========================================================================
  AN EIRENICON
  by Edward Bouverie Pusey
========================================================================

Edward Bouverie Pusey's exploration of church and communion in Christian
doctrine and practice.

  Chapters: 5

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  TABLE OF CONTENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    0. An Eirenicon
    1. POSTSCRIPT.
    2. NOTE A.
    3. NOTE B.
    4. NOTE C.

========================================================================
  CHAPTER 0: AN EIRENICON
========================================================================


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 1: POSTSCRIPT.
========================================================================

I HAD finished my letter, and it had been some time in type, before Dr. Manning
was elevated to his present important position, or the reading of the Encyclical
of last year, and the comments upon it, had shown me how advanced, above all
which was known formerly, is the present theory of Papal Infallibility.

The Ultramontanes in the Roman Communion seem to be drifting off further from
the principles of the early and undivided Church. Under Jesuit influence "the
shores of Italy "seem ever to be "receding." We could not imagine ourselves to
have lived a day out of the communion of the Church of S. Augustine. With the
knowledge which we have of it, we could not imagine any, the slightest
difficulty, which should have hindered our flying to it, had we been born in any
sect external to it. It has been the home of our faith, our affections, our
understanding, now to gray hairs. Like God's word, so that undivided Church of
God satisfies our whole selves. There are no clouds there. In its faith we have
been ever at rest. Even in the Gallican Church, a century and a half ago, there
seemed to be a dawn of reunion; there was, if not clear day, at least a break in
the clouds, such as gave token that the breath of God might disperse them. Now
things seem to be taking an opposite direction. It is the boast of the English
Ultramontane party, that Gallicanism is extinct; and this not as relates to any
question of the relation of the Pope to the civil sovereign. This the successive
rulers from the Restoration of 1815 did what they could to extinguish, by
becoming the oppressors of the Church. But in regard to the central question,
where the infallibility of the Church lies, the Ultramontanes tell us that the
Gallican belief, that nothing has the seal of infallibility which has not been
received by the whole Church, is extinct in France. [490] If it is to be found
anywhere, we are, I suppose, to look to Germany, or perhaps among some of the
Gallican Bishops who have not spoken. The Dublin Review would have it, that even
the tacit reception of the Encyclical of 1864: would, even upon Gallican
principles, fix as matters of faith, not only the doctrines, virtually affirmed
by the Encyclical, as being the contradictories of the propositions condemned,
but the main principle which Pius IX. appears to have assumed, that he is
infallible in all his formal utterances, on whatever subjects, connected, in his
judgment, with the well-being of the Church, although with no visible bearing on
faith or morals, and howsoever or to whomsoever those utterances may be made. It
is for those of the Roman Communion to settle this. Of twenty-four Gallican
Bishops who spoke (including Algiers, and Chambéry, as now French), two only,
the Bishop of Nimes and Fréjus, include the old Gallican belief of reception by
the whole Episcopate in their grounds for adhesion to the late Encyclical. [491]
But twenty-two are but about one-fourth of the Bishops of France. It seems also
very possible that the Roman Catholic Episcopate

might agree in condemning all the eighty propositions, condemned in the
syllabus, and yet not intend thereby to express their belief that every
enunciation of the Pope, on whatever subject, is ipso facto infallible. For
although the writer in the Dublin Review [492] has shown that the Encyclical of
1864 does claim this, in the name of Pius IX., the doctrine does not so
explicitly lie there, as to require any Bishop, who should not assent to it, to
express any dissent. Least of all would it seem to be required that every one
who should dissent from it, should, in the present troubled state of the Church
everywhere, add such an element of discord to the present conflict. It would
make the doctrine of "reception by the Church" a nullity, if every thing was to
be held to be received, which should not be protested against, even although not
formally proposed for assent.

The claim, however, now raised, goes far beyond even the school of Bellarmine.
If established, it would, in Pontificates so full of activity as that of Pius
IX., who has issued thirty-two authoritative documents, be adding almost yearly
to the faith of those in the Roman Communion. And union with the Roman See, on
the part, e. g., of the great Russian Church, would involve this,--that every
one should be ready to receive whatever all past Popes had authoritatively
uttered, and whatever any future Pope, though unhappily a Borgia or a Julius
II., might utter upon any subject whatsoever.

To the great Gallican Divines, however respectfully they spoke of the Pope, he
was but one element in the infallibility of the whole Church. Since universal
reception was the test of the infallibility of any decision of the Church,
nothing could have this seal of infallibility, which was not received by him who
was in dignity its first Bishop. It needed not, however, that what should become
infallible, should always emanate from him; nor did it. The Anti-Pelagian
statements of faith, e. g., which were received by the whole Church, came from
S. Augustine and Africa; the concluding parts of the Niceno-Constantinopolitan
Creed came from a Council in which the East only was represented, but which
became General through its reception by the West. To say, then, that the
enunciations of the Pope became infallible through their reception by the whole
Episcopate, would be a one-sided statement of Gallicanism; because such
universal reception would equally render infallible any statement of faith which
a Provincial Council should draw up against heresy: only in this case the Bishop
of Rome would be an important member of those who should receive it.

From this, the doctrine set forth in Bellarmine differed, in that it ascribed
infallibility to the Pope personally, but this with a limitation of its
subject-matter. His two canons in this respect are:--1) "The Pontiff, when he
teaches the whole Church, can in no case err in those things which appertain to
faith." [493] 2) "Not only in precepts of faith cannot he err, but neither can
he in precepts of morals, which are prescribed to the whole Church, and which
relate to things necessary to salvation, or to such as are good or lad

in themselves." [494]

The doctrine, which places such an awful power in the hands of an individual, is
limited in two ways in Bellarmine's statement: 1) as to the formal way, in which
the enunciation to be received as infallible is to be made. The "matters of
faith" are to be such as are "taught to the whole Church;" the "precepts of
morals" are to be "prescribed to the whole Church." 2) In regard to morals, mere
benefit to the Church is excluded. They are to be simply things "good or bad in
themselves or necessary to salvation." Matters of fact are omitted altogether.
Nothing is said of them, either that they do, or do not, fall within the scope
of Papal infallibility.

It has recently been drawn out: [495] 1. That Pius IX. claims infallibility in
judgments which he puts forth, "which do not touch the dogmas of faith and
morals," but "whose object is declared [by him to regard the Church's right
discipline and general good. His declarations on his civil princedom [i. e. on
his temporal sovereignty over his temporal subjects in Italy'] may be given as
instances in point." These statements of infallible truth need not, then,
obviously be connected with the substance of revelation, or be supported by any
thing in Holy Scripture or tradition, bearing on the subject. 2. That these
statements, in order to their infallibility, need not be addressed to the whole
Episcopate, or be in any way formal in their character, but may be contained in
letters to this or that individual pastor." [496] 3. That consequently all the
statements put forth in the Syllabus of 1864 are infallible truth. 4. It follows
that Papal infallibility is held to extend to matters of fact, and to things
unconnected with former revelation. 5. Since the claim for infallibility in
these statements has been put forth, although not totidem verbis,' in the
Encyclical of 1864, then, it is to follow, that each successive Pope is
infallible on any of those or the like subjects, in whatever way or to
whomsoever he may speak.

The errors condemned at the beginning of the Encyclical cannot, indeed, be said
to have been condemned by any authority but that of our Lord. For Pius IX.
condemned, so far, denials of God, of His Providence, and His revelations, which
every peasant knows to be blasphemous. Others, again, of the propositions
condemned are naked Erastianism. Some deny the first principles of morals.

I would only, in illustration of what I mean, speak of those, in regard to which
the claim of infallibility is an advance apparently upon what has been hitherto
taught in the Roman Communion. 1. As to matters of fact, it is claimed to be
infallible truth,--that "no Pope [497] ever exceeded the limits of his power, or
usurped the rights of princes, or erred in defining matters of faith or morals,"
in which case Bossuet would be found, in regard to the last, in opposition to
infallible truth. Again, it is to become infallible truth, that [498] "no too
arbitrary acts of any Roman Pontiff contributed to the Church's division into
east and west." Then, it is to be pronounced infallibly, that the Pope was right
in the original unhappy dispute, with Photius and Ignatius alike, about
Bulgaria, or in that which Fleury lamented, as finally fixing the schism, the
setting up of a Latin Emperor and Latin Patriarchs, or in insisting on the
addition of the Filioque in the Nicene Creed to be recited by the Greeks, after
having acknowledged that the Greek and Latin Fathers, while using different
formulae, meant the same thing; and yet subsequent Popes have abandoned this
requisition in the case of the Greeks who have united themselves to the Latin
Church. 2. Again, it is to become infallible truth, that [499] "Boniface VIII.
was not the first who asserted that the vow of chastity, made at ordination,
annuls marriage,"--a point which would fall, one should have thought, under
human learning, not, at this date, of Divine revelation. Again, it becomes
infallible truth, that [500] "civil liberty of all worships, and full power
granted to all publicly to manifest any opinions or thoughts whatsoever,
conduces to the more ready corruption of the morals and minds of peoples, and to
propagate the plague of indifferentism." A most thoughtful observer in the Roman
Communion has said to this effect, "I had rather have to do with the open
infidelity of the nineteenth century, than with the hidden infidelity of the
middle ages." This is no contradiction of the statement of Pius IX., but might
make an essential limitation of it, viz., that some ways of attempting to check
a great evil, the open spread of unbelief, might produce a greater,-- an
unbelief spreading unchecked and unhealed, because hidden. 3. In regard to
matters which do not relate to the substance of the faith or of morals, we have
now a formal pronouncement, that the toleration of religious worship,

other than the Roman Catholic, is in itself inexpedient; [501] that immigrants,
at least in some Roman Catholic countries, ought to be prohibited the use of
their public worship; [502] that [503] "the Church has power to employ force
against persons [vis inferendæ], and has temporal power direct or indirect."
Pius IX. placed the denial of this power of the Church in the front of the
propositions, from which, he says, [504] "It is clear that the author [Nuytz],
by such doctrine and such maxims, aims at perverting the constitution and the
government of the Church, and the entire destruction of the Catholic faith, in
that he deprives the Church of external judgment and corrective power, to the
intent that those in error may return into the way of righteousness."

It is, then, to be infallibly certain, that this "corrective force" (such as was
exercised by the Inquisition, or in the reign of Henry VIII., or Queen Mary) is
essential to the maintenance of the Catholic faith; and that, as used not only
against heresiarchs, but "in order that those in error may return to the way of
justice." In fact, the only ground of not using it would be its visible
inexpediency. Only such employment of force, as would exasperate, not
extinguish, is unadvised.

Further, Pius IX. condemns, as by infallible authority, the denial of the
temporal authority of the Church, or of the single Bishop; [505] of the immunity
of Clerks from being sued or prosecuted in Civil or Criminal Courts, at least
without consent of the Pope; [506]

"of the sinfulness of the political principle of non-intervention,'" [507] or
the ascription of "the right called Appel comme d'Abus' to the civil power, even
when exercised by an unbelieving ruler," [508] the opinion that [509] "the
abrogation of the civil princedom which the Apostolic See enjoys [i. e. the
authority which the Pope possesses as king over his imperial subjects in Italy']
[510] would conduce in the highest degree to the Church's liberty and felicity."

The two opinions on the civil princedom of the Papacy, condemned in the
Syllabus, are very pronounced. The one states that its abolition would be a
benefit; the other, though less strong in words, is stronger in fact: for Nuytz
stated, that [511] "sons of the Christian and Catholic Church disputed among
themselves as to the compatibility of the temporal kingdom with the
spiritual,"--which involves that some at least doubted whether the temporal
power was not morally wrong.

Neither condemnation lays down a positive doctrine obligatory upon Roman
Catholics. The Syllabus however states, that [512] "many other errors are
implicitly reprobated in the doctrine which all Catholics ought most firmly to
hold on the civil princedom of the Roman Pontiff," and that "this doctrine is
clearly taught in "five Allocutions and one Apostolic letter, which it names.
The doctrine is most fully stated in the earliest of 1849, that, "when [513] the
Roman Empire was divided into many kingdoms and various states, it was by a very
singular counsel of Divine Providence that the Roman

Pontiff, to whom the government and care of the whole Church was committed by
the Lord Christ, should on this ground have a civil princedom, that he might,
for the government of the Church itself and for the maintenance of its unity,
enjoy that full liberty which is required for discharging the supreme Apostolic
ministry. For all know that the faithful people, nations, kingdoms, would never
yield full confidence and observance to the Roman Pontiff, if they saw him
subject to the dominion of any prince or government, and not free. For the
faithful people and kingdoms would never cease vehemently to suspect and fear,
that the Pontiff would conform his acts to the will of the prince or government
in whose dominions he lived, and therefore would not hesitate often, under that
pretext, to contradict those acts. And let the enemies of the civil princedom of
the Apostolic See, who now rule at Rome, themselves say with what confidence or
observance they themselves would receive the exhortations, admonitions,
mandates, constitutions of the supreme Pontiff, if they knew him to be subject
to the empire of any prince or government, especially if he were the subject of
any prince, between whom and the Roman state there should be any lasting war."

On this ground Pius IX. said, "The nature of our office requires that, in
maintaining the civil princedom of the Apostolic See, we should defend with all
our might the rights and possessions of the holy Roman Church, and the liberty
of that See, which is conjoined with the liberty and advantage of the whole
Church."

The other Allocutions add nothing to this, [514] except, perhaps, that the Cum
catholica ascribes the temporal government more directly to "the Will of God;
"and the Maxima quidem says, "that the civil princedom was necessary," [515]
which may be a little stronger than required.

I have purposely selected such statements only as do not in themselves "touch
upon faith or morals." I will only instance one more, as showing that every
sentence in every pronouncement of the Pope is to be held as infallible. Prop.
LXL, "The injustice of a fact, being prospered, brings no detriment to the
sanctity of the right," is only an incidental statement of the jamdudum
cernimus, [516] in contradiction of the claim that the Pope should yield up his
right in those of the ecclesiastical states which had been rent

from him. The claim, of course, was shameless on the part of those who wrested
them unjustly from him. But now it is made an abstract proposition, to be
condemned by all Catholics. Incidental statements then are, equally with the
most formal propositions, matters of faith. Yet the proposition necessarily
requires limitation. For, since S. Paul commands us to submit to "the powers
that be," [517] this submission must often be paid to those who are kings "de
facto," and not "de jure." On this principle the early Christians yielded
obedience to each successive Emperor. This principle, which justified the
obedience to William and Mary, justified obedience to the first and third
Napoleon, whom Popes recognized. The proposition is equivalent to the proverb,
"might makes right," and is, in fact, a denial of justice; yet S. Paul requires
us to submit, as to a Divine ordinance, to authority, whose only "right" is its
"might."

In this case, however, the pronouncement did relate to a moral rule. I instance
it only as evidencing the extent of the claim of infallibility. ISTot only the
main proposition, but every argument used in all these Allocutions is held to be
equally infallible truth. This illustrates the compass of the infallibility
claimed. It is an infallibility equal in extent to that of the Divine
Scriptures; so that each sentence, however incidental, becomes, like the Word of
God, a sacred text.

The doctrine of Papal infallibility, laid down by Bellarmine, is declared in the
Encyclical of last year to be inadequate. Pius IX. distinctly rejects, as [518]
"contrary to the Catholic dogma of the full power divinely given to the Roman
Pontiff by the Lord Christ Himself, of feeding, ruling, and governing the
Universal Church, the audacity of those who, not enduring sound doctrine,'
contend that without [deadly] sin, and without any loss of Catholic profession,
assent and obedience may be withheld from those judgments and decrees of the
Apostolic See, whose object is declared to regard the general good of the
Church, its rights and discipline, provided that that object does not touch upon
dogmas of faith and morals." And this "assent" to every utterance of the Pope is
required to all his "judgments," which [519] "determine concerning truth and
falsehood," and that, tinder pain of mortal sin. "Cardinal Patrizi, writing,"
says the Dublin Review, [520] "to the Catholics of Pius IX.'s own diocese, by
his express sanction, and under his very eye, claims for the Encyclical, and,
consequently, for every like expression of the Pope's mind, to be the very word
of God, to be received on pain of forfeiting heaven." But then obviously the
same must apply to all past ages; and all genuine judgments and decrees of all
the past Bishops of Rome, upon whatever subject, whether bearing directly upon
faith or morals, or upon the general good of the Church, will be to be regarded
as "the very

word of God." Had this doctrine been held in times past, the very existence of
General Councils appears to me perfectly unintelligible. For, if the word of the
Pope was "the word of God," there was no occasion for any declaration of the
hereditary faith throughout the Church, such as the General Councils affirmed.
Roman-Catholic writers will perhaps explain, where was the room for the appeal
to Scripture and unbroken tradition as depositories of the faith, if the word of
each successive Pope was itself "the word of God."

This extension of Papal Infallibility would, I should think, embarrass the
defence of the system. For those who have denied the personal infallibility of
the Pope, like Bossuet, have confined themselves to pointing out those cases in
which any Pope seemed to have fallen into great and obvious error. Now, since
every portion of the teaching of any Pope is to be infallible, it will
apparently have to be shown how any statement of any Pope which has since been
abandoned, is consistent with such infallibility. To take the one subject of
prohibited marriages. S. Gregory the Great declares on the ground of Leviticus,
c. 18, that marriage "with a sister-in-law is forbidden, because through her
former union she became the brother's flesh." In a formal answer to an inquiry
of S. Augustine of Canterbury, "at what degree of consanguinity may the faithful
marry, and may marriage be contracted with stepmothers or sisters-in-law? "S.
Gregory states, "it is necessary that, in order to marry lawfully, they should
be in the third or fourth degree," i.

e. second or third cousins, and prohibits, on ground of Divine law, marriage
with the sister-in-law, as well as with the mother-in-law. [521] This was
directly contradicted by the unhappy Borgia (Alexander VI.), who gave a
dispensation to marry a sister-in-law [522] and an aunt. [523] But Pope Innocent
III. answered formally, that in the degrees, prohibited by the Divine law, a
dispensation cannot be given,--"dispensari non possit." He spoke, in three
Epistles, [524] of degrees prohibited "by Divine law," i. e. as explained, and
according to the known use of the term, "the Levitical law." Cardinal de
Turrecremata, acting by command of Pope Eugenius, pronounced that "the Pope
could not dispense" when the Dauphin asked to be allowed to marry his deceased
wife 's sister.

Then also Pope Celestine was equally infallible, when he declared that [525]
"the charge of teaching has descended [from the Apostles] equally upon all
Bishops. We are all engaged in it by an hereditary right; all we, who have come
in their (the Apostles')

stead, preach the name of our Lord to all the countries of the world, according
to what was said to them, Go ye, and teach all nations.' You are to observe, my
brethren, that the order we have received is a general order, and that He
intended that we should all execute it, when He charged them with it, as a duty
devolving equally upon all. We ought all to enter into the labours of those whom
we have all succeeded in dignity." Not, as people now say, the Pope alone, but
according to Pope Celestine, [526] "the assembly of priests is the visible
display of the presence of the Holy Ghost. He Who cannot lie has said, Where two
or three are gathered together in My Name, there am I in the midst of them:'
much more will He be present in so large a crowd of holy men, for the Council is
holy in a peculiar sense, as the representative of that most holy synod of
Apostles which we read of. Their Master, Whom they were commanded to preach,
never forsook them. It was He Who taught them; it was He Who instructed them
what they should teach others; and He has assured the world, that in the persons
of the Apostles, they hear Him."

Then S. Leo was infallible, when he spoke of his own clear statement of doctrine
having been confirmed by the whole Church. "What God has before decreed by our
ministry, He confirmed by the irreversible assent of the whole brotherhood, to
show that what was first put forth in form by the first See of all, and then
received by the judgment of the whole Christian world, really proceeded from
Himself." [527]

Then S. Gregory the Great was infallible, when he spoke of the See of S. Peter
as existing equally in Home, Alexandria, and Antioch. "And thus though the
Apostles be many, yet the See of the chief of the Apostles, which belongs to
one, though it is in three places, alone prevailed in authority, by virtue of
his chiefship. For it is he who exalted the See, in which he also condescended
to take his rest, and finish the present life [Borne]. It is he who adorned the
See, to which he sent the Evangelist, his disciple [Alexandria]. It is he who
established the See in which he sat for seven years, though he was to leave it
[Antioch]. Inasmuch then as the See, over which by Divine authority three
Bishops now preside, is one man's and one, whatever good I hear of you, I lay to
mine own account." [528]

He was infallible when he said, [529] "Himself [the Mediator of God and man'] is
the Rock from which Peter received his name, and upon which He said that He
would build His Church." He was infallible when he said, "It is now said to the
universal Church, Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth,' "&c. [530]

He was infallible when he said, [531] "No one of my predecessors ever consented
to use so profane a term [as Universal Bishop], because plainly, if a single
Patriarch is called universal, the name of Patriarch is taken from the rest.
Wherefore let your Holiness

in your letters never call any one universal, lest in offering undue honour to
another, you should deprive yourself of that which is your due." "He endeavours
to claim the whole to himself, and aims by the pride of this pompous language to
subjugate to himself all the members of Christ, which are joined together to the
one sole Head, that is, Christ. If this is allowed to be said freely, the honour
of all Patriarchs is denied. And when, perchance, he who is termed universal,
perishes in error, presently no Bishop is found to have remained in a state of
duty. Stand firm, stand fearless; presume not ever either to give, or to receive
letters with this false title of Universal." "I exhort and advise that no one of
you ever give countenance to this name, ever agree to it, ever write it, ever
receive a writing wherein it is contained, or add his subscription, but, as it
behoves ministers of Almighty God, keep himself clear from such poisonous
infection; since this is done to the injury and disruption of the whole Church,
and, as we have said, in contempt of all of you. For if, as he thinks, one is
universal, it remains that you are not Bishops." [532] "To consent to this
nefarious name, is nothing else but to lose our faith." [533] "I confidently
affirm, that whoever calls himself, or desires to he called universal Priest, in
his pride goes before Antichrist,--whoever he is, who desires to be called sole
Priest, he lifts himself up above all other priests." [534] "Far from Christian
hearts he that blasphemous name, in which the honour of all the Priests
[Bishops] is taken away, while it is madly arrogated by one to himself. [535]
Certainly, to do honour to the blessed Peter, chief of the Apostles, this was
offered to the Roman Pontiff per [536] the venerable Council of Chalcedon. But
no one of them ever consented to use this singular appellation, that all Priests
[Bishops] might not be deprived of their due honour by something peculiar being
given to one. How is it, then, that we seek not the glory of this name, though
offered us, yet another presumes to claim it, though not offered?" "If [537] one
Bishop be called universal, the whole Church falls to pieces if that one, being
universal, falls." "Your

Blessedness [538] has also taken pains to tell me that you no longer write to
certain persons those proud names which have sprung from the root of vanity, and
you address me, saying, as you commanded,' which word command' I beg you to
remove from my ears, because I know who I am, and who you are. For in rank you
are my brother, in character my father. I did not, therefore, command, but took
pains to point out what I thought advantageous. I do not, however, find that
your Blessedness was willing altogether to observe the very thing I pressed upon
you. For I said that you should not write any such thing either to me or to any
one else; and, lo! in the heading of your letter, directed to me, the very
person who forbad it, you set that haughty appellation, calling me universal
Pope, which I beg your Holiness to do no more, because whatever is given to
another more than reason requires, is so much taken away from yourself I do not
consider that an honour, by which I acknowledge that my brethren lose their own.
For my honour is the honour of the Universal Church. My honour is the unimpaired
honour of my brethren. Then am I truly honoured, when the due honour is not
denied to each one in his degree.

For if your Holiness calls me universal Pope, you deny that you yourself are
what you admit me to be, universal." "By this [539] rash presumption the peace
of the whole Church is disturbed, and the grace, poured out upon all in common,
contradicted. Surely the Apostle Paul, hearing some one say, I am of Paul, I of
Apollos, I of Cephas,' exclaimed in exceeding horror at this rending of the
Lord's body, by which His members attached themselves, as it were, to other
heads, saying, Was Paul crucified for you, or were ye baptized in the name of
Paul? ' If he then rejected the members of the Lord's body being subjected to
certain heads, as it were, besides Christ, and that even to Apostles themselves,
as leaders of parts, what will you say to Christ, Who is, as you know, the Head
of the Universal Church, in the examination of the last judgment,--you, who
endeavour to subject to yourself, under the name of Universal, all His members?
Who, I say, in this perverse name, is set forth for imitation, but he, who
despised the legions of angels joined as companions to himself, and endeavoured
to rise to a height unapproached by all, that he might seem to be subject to
none, and be alone superior to all? (quoting Isa. xiv. 13, 14.) Surely Peter,
the first of the Apostles, is a member of the holy Universal Church; Paul,
Andrew, John,--what else are they but the heads of particular communities? And
yet all are members under One Head. And to comprehend all under one brief
expression, the saints before the law, the saints under the law, the saints
under grace,--all these, making up the body of the Lord, are dispersed among the
members of the Church, and no one ever wished to be called universal. No one
ever chose to be called by such a name; no one claimed to himself this rash
appellation; lest, should he claim to himself the glory of singularity in the
rank of the High Priesthood, he might seem to have denied it to all his
brethren. What, therefore, dearest brother, will you say in that terrible
examination of the judgment to come,--you, who covet to be called not merely
father, but common father?"

Then S. Leo IX. was infallible when he said, [540] "The humility of those
venerable Pontiffs [the Bishops of Rome], worthy of all imitation, considering
that the chief of the Apostles is not found called universal Apostle, utterly
rejected that proud name, by which their equality of rank seemed to be taken
away from all Prelates throughout the world, in that a claim was made for one
upon the whole."

Then Leo II. was infallible, who, when the Acts of the sixth General Council
were sent him, wrote back, [541] "We anathematize alike those inventors of new
error, Theodore, Bp. of Pharan; Cyrus, of Alexandria, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul,
Peter, plotters against, rather than Prelates of the Church of Constantinople;
and also Honorius, who did not illumine this Apostolical Church with the
doctrine of Apostolic tradition, but, by a foul betrayal, attempted to subvert
its spotless faith."

Then S. Leo I. was infallible, when he rejected the 28th Canon of the Council of
Chalcedon, which placed Constantinople in the second rank, next to Rome, as
being [542] "opposed to the rules of the sacred Canons established at Nicæa," in
that he says, "In all Ecclesiastical causes we obey those laws which the Holy
Spirit, by means of the 318 Prelates, appointed for the peaceable observance of
all Priests," &c. And Pope Adrian was infallible when he said, [543] "He [the
Patriarch of Constantinople] never could have ranked second, save for the
authority of our holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, as is plain to all" (which
rank, however, Constantinople took, and had on the authority of the Canon, from
the time of the Council itself).

Then, again, S. Leo was infallible, when he said, [544] "The Lord Jesus, then,
was alone born innocent among the sons of men, because He alone was conceived
without the pollution of carnal concupiscence;" and Pope Gelasius, [545] when
speaking of "saints, who have by God's abundant grace easily overcome the vices
of mortality," yet "attest that they were not yet so free from them, so that it
should be peculiar (proprium) to that Immaculate Lamb to have had absolutely no
sin, lest this should not seem to be a thing to be ascribed to Him alone, if any
other saint whatsoever should be believed to have been free from offence." And
Innocent III., when he said, [546] "That one (Eve) was produced without fault,
but produced unto fault; but this one (Mary) was produced in fault, but produced
without fault. That one was said to be Eva; to this one was said Ave;" and that
"the Holy Ghost [547] purified her soul from original sin in her mother's womb"
which is

what Gregory XV. denied by implication, when he removed the word "sanctification
"from the liturgies.

I have set down no difficulty which I do not myself think insurmountable. I see
absolutely no way in which, upon the forbidden degrees, Alexander VI. can be
reconciled with Gregory I., or how the acceptance of the sixth General Council,
which anathematized Honorius as a heretic, by Leo II., and his own individual
condemnation of him, are reconcileable with the doctrine of the infallibility of
both, in all which they pronounce; or how the rejection of the position of
Constantinople, on the ground of the immutable decrees of Nice by Leo I., is
consistent with the statement of Adrian, that that see owed its position to
Rome; or how S. Gregory's denunciation, not only of the title "Universal
Bishop," but of what the title contained, and that, in any sense in which it
could be supposed to be taken by the Patriarch of Constantinople, not as taken
by that Patriarch only, but as unbecoming himself also, is compatible with the
Ultramontane theories about the Pope. It is a characteristic of the word of God,
that it "abideth for Pius

IX. could not, I should think, adopt the language of Gregory I., as to the
marriage of those near of kin, or in denying his own right to be called
"Universal Bishop," or to what the Patriarch of Constantinople meant to assume
by that name; nor could he, I conceive, use the language of S. Leo or Gelasius,
of Christ "alone being born innocent," or having alone had absolutely no sin;
still less that of Innocent III., that "she was produced in fault," "producta in
culpa," or that "she was sanctified from original sin in her mother's womb."

These are but specimens of inextricable difficulties, in which, I fear, the
Roman Church would involve itself by acceding to this doctrine of the Papal
infallibility not only as to matters of faith and doctrine, but as to matters
not connected therewith, and even as to historical facts. This theory is not yet
put forth for actual acceptance, although it is contained in the Encyclical of
1864. It is even remarkable that, out of nineteen propositions of Nuytz, [548]
all are condemned except two, which related personally to the Pope. Of these,
the bearings of the one I do not understand,--" The personal law of the Pontiff
cannot be the sole law." The other is in direct terms, "The Pope is not
infallible." However the contrary is implied in the Encyclical, yet the marked
omission of this, among the propositions condemned in the Syllabus, seems to
imply that Pius IX. does not yet think the state of minds in the Roman Church
ripe for a formal decision. It seems a state of things analogous to that, when
the Greeks had avowed their disbelief in any material fire of Purgatory, and
that belief was not affirmed.

Dr. (now Archbishop) Manning, however, two years ago, had so made the belief in
the personal Infallibility of the Pope on matters not directly relating to faith
and morals part of his Creed, that he made the temporal princedom of the Pope
also a part of

that Creed, and maintained that "non-intervention in the question of the
temporal power of the Pope is essentially a denial of the divine institution of
the Church." He declares "that the English government, [549] as proclaiming the
principle of non-intervention in the Roman question, thereby denies the divine
authority of the Church," as well as of "the Holy See, and its divine mission to
the nations of the world."

He forgets, apparently, the good deeds of England in restoring Pius VII., and,
on the ground of a doctrine, ruled by Pius IX. fourteen years before, and not as
yet formally proposed to be accepted by the Church, he declares that "the
English government, [550] in proclaiming this principle of non-intervention,
assumes an attitude towards Christianity and the Church, and towards the
Christian society, which gives it at this moment the melancholy pre-eminence of
being the most Anti-Catholic, and therefore, if not in its intentions, certainly
in its influences and results, the most Anti-Christian power in the world."
Happy condition of the world, when mere neutrality makes a civil power the most
Anti-Christian in it!

And yet, according to another Ultramontane writer, "9 the Church's whole
doctrine on his civil princedom, as regards its methodical expression, has been
commenced, matured, and perfected by Pius IX."

Before, it was an open question, whether or no the civil princedom did, or did
not, contribute to strengthen the spiritual power of the Pope. Pius IX. has
adopted the arguments, and nearly the words of an eminent French Bishop of the
seventeenth century in maintaining that it does, amid the mutual jealousies of
the Roman Catholic powers. [551] There is much to be alleged for it.
Contrariwise, it has been the occasion of very grievous ill. "Witness the
warlike and intriguing Popedom of Julius II. Fleury balances the evil and the
good, and of himself evidently thought the evil to preponderate. He says: [552]

"Leo IX. and the Popes who undertook to repair the ruins of the 11th century,
and to restore the Roman Church to its lustre, wished also to re-establish its
temporal powers, which they founded, first on the donation of Constantine,' then
on those of Pepin, Charlemagne, Louis le Débonnaire, and Otho. All the world
knows now what is the donation of Constantine;' and its falsehood is more
universally recognized than that of the decretals of Isidore; but, at the time
of these Popes, its truth, was not questioned. S. Bernard presupposed it, when
he said to Pope Eugenius that he was the successor not only of Peter, but of

Constantine: it was known and received as early as the 9th century, and minds
hardly began to be disabused of it toward the middle of the 15th. Even the
Greeks received it, as appears in Balsamon, who quotes it entire, and claims to
found upon it the prerogatives of the see of Constantinople.

"Geoffrey of Viterbo, speaking of the donation of Constantine,' in his
abridgment of history dedicated to Pope Urban III., said that many thought that
the Church had been more holy in the three first centuries, but that afterwards
it was more happy.' Whoever advanced this beautiful sentence held sentiments
very low, much beneath not the Gospel only, but human philosophy. Any one, ever
so little above the common herd, sees readily that the pure happiness of this
life is in virtue, not in riches; but one who believes the Gospel may not doubt
it. Jesus Christ showed it by His example and His words; since, being the Lord
of all riches and all human greatness, He sovereignly despised them, and
bequeathed to His disciples poverty and suffering as their only inheritance. I
still then return to this question; did they in the 11th century discover a
wisdom unknown before, and were Leo IX. and Gregory VII. more enlightened than
S. Leo or S. Gregory!

"These great Popes had not yet explored their archives enough to find there the
donation of Constantine;' they were neither sovereign Princes nor temporal
Lords, and yet they did not complain that any thing was wanting to their power,
and had no time to spare, after their spiritual occupations. They were persuaded
of the distinction of the two powers so well expressed by Pope Gelasius, [553]
when he said that Emperors themselves are subject to Bishops in the order of
religion, and that in the political order Bishops, even he of the first see,
obey the laws of Emperors."

Then, after defending the lawfulness of Ecclesiastical property in itself, even
that "Bishops became Counts, Dukes, and Princes, as they still are in Germany:
even (which is furthest from the institution) monks, whom their humility had put
below all men, found themselves with subjects and vassals, and their Abbots
gained the rank of Seignors and Princes," he adds, "All these rights are
legitimate; it is not lawful to dispute them with the Church more than with
laymen; and, to return to the Roman Church, it would be very unjust to dispute
with it the sovereignty of Rome and of great part of Italy, of which it has been
in possession for so many centuries, since most sovereigns have no better title
than long possession.

"Arnold of Brescia, then, was rightly condemned, who stirred up the Romans
against the Pope, maintaining broadly that the Clergy ought not to have
seignories, lands, or real property, but ought to be supported solely by alms
and voluntary offerings. Yet I own I should have been glad to find in authors of
Arnold's time the reasons whereby they refuted his errors. For the two letters
of S. Bernard to the Romans thereon are only pathetic declarations, in which he
enters into no proof, and presupposes the rights of the Pope indisputable. [554]
Then, too, he did not, as we saw, question the donation of Constantine.' This
document, if true, established the fact and the special right of the Pope; and
for the right of the Clergy in general, it was unquestionable, as I have just
shown.

"But that most wise maxim of the Apostle should have been remembered, that what
is lawful is not always expedient; [555] and it should have been borne in mind
(as did those of old) that the human mind is too limited to be equal to exercise
at once spiritual and temporal power. At least, men ought to have respected the
practice of those of old, and should have thought that, had the donation of
Constantine been true, S. Leo and S. Gregory would have known it, and would have
had good reasons for not using it, as it is certain they did not. The experience
of more than 600 years has shown the great wisdom of their conduct. Bishops who
are simply Bishops give little hold to the temporal power; [556] whereas it has
continually grounds of quarrel with Bishops who are Lords. The holy Bishops
liked but too well to have temporal

goods to manage. We see how S. Chrysostom complained of it, [557] and S. Ambrose
discharged the care even of his patrimony on his brother Satyrus.

"When the Church established the rule of admitting those only into the Church
who had embraced a life of continence, it had not only regard to the purity
befitting the frequent approach of the sacred mysteries; she also wished that
her chief ministers should be disengaged from the cares which marriage
necessarily brings, and which made S. Paul say that the married man is divided
between God and the world. [558] But what is the care of one family compared
with the care of a whole state? What is the well ordering of a wife with five or
six children compared with the government of 100,000 subjects?

"We are naturally more struck with sensible objects than with spiritual. A
Prince is occupied in repressing crimes, preventing seditions and conspiracies
against his person and state. He labours to preserve and defend it against its
enemies without, and to avail himself of occasions of aggrandizing it. To this
end he has to raise and maintain troops, fortify places, amass treasures, to
provide for so many expenses. He must correspond with neighbouring princes,
negotiate, make treaties of commerce and alliance. To a politician these things
seem great and serious; ecclesiastical functions seem to him little, and almost
childish. To chant in a church, walk in procession, act in ceremonies,
chatechize, appear to him ordinary occupations, of which the first comer is
capable. What in his eyes is important and solid is to maintain his power, and
weaken his enemies. He regards prayer, reading, meditation on Holy Scripture as
occupations more befitting a monk than a statesman, and he finds no time to give
to them. You have seen what fears S. Bernard had for Pope Eugenius lest
overwhelming business should hinder him from reflecting daily on his duties and
himself, and he should fall at last into a state of obduracy.

"Perhaps you will believe that a Prince-Bishop will reserve to himself his
spiritual functions, and will throw the burden of the government of the state on
some layman. He will take care not to do this, for fear the layman should become
the real Prince. Bather he will abandon the spiritual part to others; for he
fears nothing from a Priest, a Grand-Vicar, a Suffragan Bishop. He will
willingly leave them the study of theology and the canons, preaching, cure of
souls, of which he will at most have a general account rendered to him; but he
will have detailed accounts of his troops, his fortresses, his finances. He will
give charge of them to other ecclesiastics, whom he will trust more than laymen,
but who will be ecclesiastics in form, and in truth men of business. If you
doubt it, see how the diocese and states of those so powerful princes of Germany
and Poland are governed. You will see by this experience, that those of old were
very wise, and that the alliance of temporal with the spiritual power was
advantageous neither to religion, nor to the state. As to religion, it is
evident that it was better upheld by Bishops who were purely Bishops, and
exclusively occupied with spiritual things, as S. Ambrose and S. Augustine."

I have given this long extract from Fleury, to show the freedom with which this
subject of the civil princedom used to be discussed, as being entirely an open
question. At the commencement of the present Pontificate it still was so, even
in Rome itself. Now a declaration of Pius IX., that "it came in the Providence
of God," and that (which time alone could show) it is "necessary" to the due
exercise of the Pope's spiritual authority, has made, we are told, a new article
of faith, so that to take no side about it is to "deny the Divine authority of
the Church."

For, unless the declaration of the Pope had made it a matter of faith, it is
obviously a subject of speculation of human wisdom. Fleury says, that, before
the existence of this civil princedom, the Popes did not feel any thing wanting
to their spiritual power,--such power as they used before the false decretals.
The event only could show that the loss of that civil princedom would impair
what they have now.

Unless Pius IX. be directly inspired by God, like one of the old Prophets, to
foretell that its abandonment would involve its injury or forfeiture, it is a
question of human wisdom still.

Secular policy hangs over the relations of the Pope to Pepin; [559] and what was
originally a fief, held of a secular monarch, became, by what all acknowledge to
have been a forgery, "the donation of Constantine,"--an abdication of the
temporal government in behalf of the Pope. Its loss, had human ambition had its
way, would have been an event of God's Providence, Whose love is never more
visible than when He chastens.

The whole turns on the inspiration of that word "necessary." Unless the Pope is
so inspired, that every word of his, even in matters not bearing on faith and
morals, is "the very word of God," it does not follow that "non-intervention as
to the question of the temporal power of the Pope is essentially a denial of the
Divine institution of the Church."

The present Ultramontanes have apparently changed the old Ultramontane doctrine
of the inerrancy of the Pope, i. e. that of his preservation from error, into
that of Divine perpetual inspir ation. We have, according to them, a perpetual
revelation from God, disclosing new truths as infallibly as if S. Peter, or S.
Paul, or S. John were yet on this earth. One recently returned from Rome, had
the impression that "some of the extreme" Ultramontanes, "if they do not say so
in so many words, imply a quasi-hypostatic union of the Holy Ghost with each
successive Pope." [560] It is well that they should know the impression which
they give to those most disposed towards them. Archbishop Manning has recently
said:--

"It is surely by a disposition of the Divine Head of the Church, that, in the
heart of the 19th century, when both the intellects and wills of men have
reached an excess of unbelief and of licence in matters of revelation, of
morals, and of politics, the Vicar of our Lord, the Teacher of all Christians
(as the Council of Florence entitles him), should twice in these last years have
spoken with the voice of infallible truth, thereby testifying not only to the
singular prerogative, which, as the first-fruits of grace, was bestowed upon

the Immaculate Mother of God, and to the great constructive principles of
morality and jurisprudence, on which the Christian world is founded, but also to
the perpetual assistance of the Spirit of God, by whose light the Church and its
Pontiffs, in all ages, now as in the beginning, discern and declare the limits
of truth and falsehood. The dogmatic Bull of the Immaculate Conception, and the
Encyclical of last year will, we believe, mark an epoch in the reconstruction of
the Christian order of the world." [561]

I know not why Archbishop Manning has selected two occasions only in which Pius
IX. spoke with authority. For the Syllabus quotes thirty-two documents.
Allocutions, or Epistles, [562] all as of equal and binding authority, besides
the Encyclical Letter and Constitution on the doctrine of the Immaculate
Conception. All being of equal authority, it would follow that all are "the very
word of God;" [563] and that the Pope would be the perpetual prophet of the
Church, infallible, like Isaiah or Jeremiah, or the rest of "the goodly
fellowship of the Prophets," in every enunciation of his, on any matters of the
Church, even if contained in a letter to a single Bishop.

This would, indeed, mark an epoch, in the history of the Church. It seemed to
myself, as well as to Archbishop Manning, that the declaration of the Immaculate
Conception of the Blessed Virgin as revealed truth, is calculated to be full of
consequences, as entailing the transmutation of other "pious opinions" about her
into truths necessary to salvation. According to the principles which have been
put forth in regard to the recent Encyclical, that not only the main question
ruled, but expressions, however seemingly incidental, are infallible truth, very
much would have been so declared already. Then it would be infallible truth
(though originally a mistake of copyists), that [564] "she was to bruise the
serpent's head;" and that [565] "as Christ, the Mediator of God and man, having
taken our human nature, destroying the handwriting of the decree which was
against us, nailed it to His cross, triumphing, so the Most Holy Virgin,
conjoined with Him, by a most strait and indissoluble bond, exerting, together
with Him, and through Him, eternal enmity against the venomous serpent, and
triumphing most fully over him, bruised his head with her immaculate foot" then
it would be matter of faith, that "she slew all heresies in the whole world;"
that she is "the safest refuge of all in peril;" that "she has in her hands the
affairs of our salvation;" that the present "zeal of piety, religion, love"
towards her is not enough; that she "is placed between Christ and the Church;"
that "if we have any hope, grace, salvation, all redounds from her." It would be
infallible truth that "the Most Blessed Virgin is a tabernacle created by God
Himself, and formed by the Holy Spirit," i. e. "by God, as the one only cause,
without any operation of an earthly father, as was Jesus. For either she was
conceived after the manner of men, in which case she was created by God in the
same way in which He

creates all born by human generation, and then this would have no bearing upon
her immaculateness; or she was created by God directly, in which case there
would be no difference so far between her conception and that of our Lord."
[566] And, if these are matters of faith, it follows that every other statement,
which I have mentioned above, is virtually matter of faith too, or may be
presently made so.

Larger principles may be involved, as when the Bull Ineffabilis alleges as a
ground of a doctrinal decision that "the Church had been wont, both in
Ecclesiastical offices and in the most holy Liturgy, to transfer the words, in
which the Divine Scriptures speak of uncreated Wisdom and represent Its
everlasting origin, to the origin of that Virgin too; which origin was
fore-established by one and the same decree with the Incarnation of the Divine
Wisdom." For, in order that this should be an argument, it must be, that applied
meanings of Holy Scripture, not the literal only, should be grounds of belief,
whereas S. Thomas says, [567] "All the senses (of Holy Scripture) are founded on
one, viz. the literal, from which alone can an argument be drawn, not from what
is said allegorically, as Augustine says." [568]

Yet larger is the statement that "in the Roman Church," i. e. in the Church at
Home, "alone has religion been guarded inviolably, and from it it is requisite
that all other Churches should borrow the propagation of faith." [569] "But if
this were so, to what end," asked Narvaez, "to ask from the Churches everywhere,
what was their doctrine, or rather their devotion, as to the Immaculate
Conception? "There is, indeed, an answer, which seems to be that of the writer
of the "Constitution," that it was indeed superfluous, but that it was done to
give greater solemnity to the proceeding, "that we might deliver our supreme
judgment as solemnly as possible." But then again General Councils are declared
to be superfluous.

On the principle involved in the Encyclical of 1864: and the Syllabus, that
historical statements, made by the Pope, are infallible, it would be infallible
truth, that "this doctrine was in vigour from the most ancient times and
thoroughly implanted in the minds of the faithful, and marvellously propagated
through the Catholic Church by the care and zeal of its sacred Bishops; "in
which way it would be difficult to see how fathers, doctors, saints, and Popes,
who denied it, were not guilty of heresy; that "the distinction between the
first and second mome nt and instant conception "(the active and

passive conception) "was devised, in order to weaken the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception; "whereas notoriously it was part of the philosophy of the
day, and was the first stage of that doctrine, and the distinction was insisted
upon, in order to admit of the law of the transmission of original sin, without
admitting that it ever passed upon the soul of Mary. Again, it would be
infallible truth, that Alexander VII. spoke of the conception of Mary as
immaculate from the first moment; whereas he spoke only "of her soul, in the
first instant of its creation and infusion into the body," in conformity with
the distinction which Pius IX. rejects. Then it is infallible that his
"predecessors vehemently gloried to institute by their Apostolic authority the
feast of the Conception in the Roman Church; whereas Aquinas says, that "though
the Roman Church does not celebrate the Conception of the Blessed Virgin, it
tolerates the custom of some Churches who celebrate that festival;" [570] or
that the celebration of the festival of the Conception in itself proves that
that Conception was immaculate, whereas the Feast of the Conception of S. John
Baptist was inserted in the old Martyrologies, Roman, Usuard's, Aden's; [571]
and the feast of the Blessed Virgin, "de Spasmo," though since abolished as
unworthy of her, would imply that this too was sacred; and Sixtus IV. would be
infallible in approving an office of the Conception, which Pius V. was
infallible in suppressing, as "being made up of fictitious testimonies of
fathers and ecclesiastical writers, nowhere found in their works." [572] Or if
the lessons in any service authenticated the belief of what was celebrated in
it, then, as Narvaez says, it might become matter of faith, which "is piously
believed, that she [the Blessed Virgin] comforts the sons who are enrolled in
the society of the Scapular, who have used a little abstinence and a few
prayers, with a truly motherly affection, while they are expiated by the fire of
purgatory, and by her intervention brings them most speedily to their heavenly
home." In the same way the stigmata of S. Francis, or the piercing of the heart
of S. Theresa, might be equally matter of faith. [573]

Faber anticipated "an Age of Mary," in comparison to which all previous devotion
to her should be slight. Archbishop Manning anticipates a new era, in which the
Pope should continually be declaring new matters of faith, to be believed
without authority of Scripture or tradition, on his sole authority; or to be
supposed to have authority of Scripture or tradition, solely because he declares
them. Wherein these new eras should issue, whether in the coming of Christ, as
Faber thought, or through a collapse of faith (through the amount of that,
taught as "of faith," which was no part of God's revelation to the Church), in
the coming of Anti-Christ, God only knows.

Turrecremata spoke of old of those who, without any solid foundation, [574]
"wish by flattery to equal the Popes, as it were, to God." The unhappy marriage
of Henry VIII. with his brother's wife, with the yet more unhappy scruples of
one who had no other scruples, and the rent of England, was the fruit of that
flattery. More perilous yet may be men's strong convictions. Yet there are still
those, although slightly spoken of and depreciated by the Jesuits, who look with
misgiving on the rapid course with which this new state of things is hurried on.
[575] It was currently said at Paris, that an Archbishop said to an English
advocate of the new system, "Compared to you, Monsignor, I am not Gallican, I am
Scandinavian." To such we, to whom Bossuet or De Noailles would, we believe,
have listened, stretch forth our hands. The strife with unbelief stretches and
strains the powers of the Church everywhere; Satan's armies are united, at least
in their warfare against "the truth as it is in Jesus." Are those who would
maintain the faith in Him alone to be at variance? On the terms which Bossuet,
we hope, would have sanctioned, we long to see the Church united; to all who, in
East or West, desire to see intercommunion restored among those who hold the
faith of the undivided Church, we say, "This is not our longing only; this is
impressed on our Liturgy by those who were before us; for this, whenever we
celebrate the Holy Eucharist, we are bound to pray, that God would inspire
continually the Universal Church with the Spirit of truth, unity, and concord.'"
For this I pray daily. For this I would gladly die. "O Lord, tarry not."

[490] Dublin "Review," July, 1865, p. 130.

[491] Dublin "Review," April, 1865, p. 447.

[492] Ib. July, p. 127. The Card. Archbishop of Chamb éry also notices "the
condemnations having been published without exciting any protest," i. e., I
suppose, having been tacitly received. Ib. p. 129.

[493] De Rom. Pont. iv. 3.

[494] Ib. c. 6.

[495] Dublin "Review," April, 1868, p. 446.

[496] Ib., pp. 444, 448.

[497] Prop. xxiii., in a work of a Spanish Ecclesiastic, Lima, 1848, condemned
June 10, 1851, in the Multiplices inter, Recueil d. Alloc. Consistor.,
Encycliques, &c., citées dans l'Encycl. et Syll. 1864, p. 289, "Roman Pontiffs
and OEcumenical Councils have quitted the limits of their power, usurped the
rights of princes, and have erred even in defining matters of faith and morals."
The Dublin "Review" (April, 1865, p. 482) argues rightly, that each of these
statements is condemned as to the Popes or OEcumenical Councils, not only as to
both together.

[498] Prop. xxxviii. of Nuytz, a Turin Professor, condemned in Ad Apostolicas,
Aug. 22, 1851, that "nimia arbitria' of Roman pontiffs contributed," &c.
Recueil, p. 294.

[499] Prop. lxxii., also quoted from Nuytz, condemned Ib. In the note there
occurs, as a proposition of his, "the Emperor Justinian first annulled the
marriage of priests." Ib. p. 297.

[500] Prop. lxxix. This is not opposed to any maxim formally maintained by any
one. In the Nunquam fore, Dec. 15, 1856, Pius IX. stated, that this was the
object of the Mexican government, "In order to corrupt more easily the minds of
the people, and to propagate the detestable and most foul pest of
indifferentism,' and to attack our most holy religion, the free exercise of all
worship is admitted, and full power is given of manifesting openly and publicly
any opinions or thoughts whatever."

[501] Prop. lxxvii. The Proposition condemned is, "In this our age, it is no
longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held the only religion of
the state, all other whatsoever being shut out." The question in the Nemo
vestrum, to which reference is made, is not of any partial recognition or
endowment of any such worship, but of its being. The convention which was broken
in Spain was, "that that august religion, every other worship being shut out,
continuing to be the only religion of the Spanish nation, was to be preserved as
before," &c.

[502] Prop. lxxviii. "Hence it has been laudably provided in some Catholic
countries, that immigrants should be allowed the public exercise of their
several worships." Pius IX. had condemned such permission in New Grenada "most
energetically" (summopere), in the Acerbissimum, Sept. 27, 1852. Recueil, p.
322. To admit immigrants at all, and yet forbid them their worship, would
plainly be to give them over to entire godlessness. And, apart from the loss of
their own souls, the presence of a godless population is more perilous than that
of persons with an imperfect faith.

[503] Nuytz's proposition, denying this, is condemned in the Ad Apostolicas,
Recueil, p. 294, and Syll., Prop. xxiv.

[504] Ad Apost., Recueil, pp. 296, 7. In the Encyclical Quantæ curæ, he condemns
those who are "not ashamed to affirm, that the Church has not the right of
correcting by temporal punishments the violators of her laws." (Recueil, p. 8.)

[505] Prop, xxv., Nuytz's, condemned. "Besides the power, inherent in the
Episcopate, there is another temporal power attributed, granted either expressly
or implicitly by the civil power, which may therefore be recalled by the civil
power when it wills." It is involved then that the temporal power is inherent.
Prop, xxvii., "The sacred ministers of the Church and the Roman Pontiff are to
be excluded from all right and dominion of temporal things," is condemned in the
Maxima quidem, June 9, 1862, "as a saying uttered with all fallacy and guile."
(Recueil, p. 456.)

[506] Prop. xxx., "The immunity of the Church and of Ecclesiastical persons had
its origin from the civil law," was formed from one of F. de Paula G. Vigil,
Lima (condemned in the Multiplices inter, Recueil, p. 288), who asserted that
"the immunity of the Church and of persons, constituted by ordinance of God and
canonical sanctions, had its origin from the civil law." Prop. xxxi. was not
formally maintained as a thesis, but was acted upon. In the Allocutions referred
to, Pius IX. said, "By this new constitution proposed [in the Mexican Republic],
besides other things, every privilege of the Ecclesiastical forum is taken away"
(Nunquam fore, Recueil, p. 384), and, "a law was passed (in New Grenada) whereby
the Ecclesiastical forum is altogether taken away, and it is declared that all
causes appertaining to the same forum, even those of the Archbishop and Bishops,
whether civil or criminal, are for the future to be judged before lay tribunals
by the magistrates of that republic." (Acerbissimum, Recueil, p. 322.) The
proposition condemned is, "The ecclesiastical forum for the temporal causes of
clerks, whether civil or criminal, is to be altogether taken away, even without
consulting, or against the protest of, the Apostolic See." (Recueil, p. 22.)

[507] Prop. lxii. "The principle which they term non-intervention is to be
proclaimed and observed." The principle is condemned in the Novos et ante
broadly. "We cannot abstain from deploring, besides other things, the
destructive and pernicious principle, which they call non-intervention, not long
ago proclaimed and acted upon by some governments, and tolerated by the rest, in
the case of the unjust aggression of one government against another, so that a
sort of licence and impunity of attacking and despoiling the rights, properties,
and even territories of others against the laws of God and man, seems to be
sanctioned, as we see in this sad time." (Recueil, p. 420.)

[508] Prop. xli., Fuytz's. "That the civil power, even when exercised by an
infidel ruler, has an indirect negative power over sacred things, and not merely
the right, called exequatur, but also of appeal from abuse'" (l'appel comme
d'abus), condemned verbally in the Ad Apost., Rec. p. 294.

[509] Prop. lxxvi., from the Quibus quantisque, 1849. "We cannot but admonish
and reprove those especially, who approve that decree [of the Constituens
Romana, 1849], whereby the Roman Pontiff was despoiled of all honour and dignity
of his temporal princedom, and assert that that decree conduces in the highest
degree to the liberty and felicity of the Church herself." (Rec., p. 224.)

[510] Dublin "Review," April, 1865, p. 441, note.

[511] Prop. lxxv. condemned in the Ad Apost., Recueil, p. 294.

[512] Recueil, p. 33.

[513] Quibus quantisque, Rec. p. 224.

[514] Of the Alloc., cited in the Syll., the Si semper antea, Rec., p. 266, Cum
Catholica, Ib., p. 402, Novos, Ib., p. 420, Maxima quidem, Ib., p. 460, repeat,
unargumentatively, the statement that the civil Princedom was given by the
singular counsel of the Providence of God (the Cum Cath. says, "God willed that
this see of S. Peter should be provided with it"), for the greater benefit of
the Church, through the independent position of the Pontiff. The Jamdudum
cernimus, Rec., p. 438, only speaks of the Civil Princedom as belonging to the
R. Pontiff.

[515] The Dublin "Review," April, p. 487, in stating the doctrine, says, that
"under present circumstances it is necessary for enabling the Pope freely to
govern the Church without subjection to an earthly king." I do not find that
limitation in any document, unless the writer means, "The circumstances ever
since the division of the Roman Empire into various kingdoms," i. e., ever since
the Pope has had temporalities. The ground alleged by the Pope would apply still
more strongly to earlier times, since Persia was in continual antagonism to the
Roman Empire; but then there were neither the temporalities nor the rule.

[516] Recueil, p. 440.

[517] Rom. xiii. 1.

[518] Receuil, p. 10.

[519] Dublin "Review," April, p. 445.

[520] Ib., p. 449. Cardinal Patrizi's words there translated are, "The faithful,
who show themselves such in word and act, recognize in the voice of the Church's
visible head the very word of God [Italics of the Dublin "Review"]. That head
has authority to address the whole Church; and he who listens not to him
declares himself as no longer appertaining to ths Church, as no longer making
part of Christ's flock, and accordingly as no longer having a right to the
kingdom of heaven."

[521] Epist., lib. xi. Indict, iv. Ep. 64, Interr. 6, ed. Ben.

[522] To Emanuel, king of Portugal.

[523] To Ferdinand, king of Sicily. See Dr. Pusey's Evidence before the
commission appointed to inquire into the law of marriage, n. 464 (as reprinted
with Pref., pp. 26, 27).

[524] De Restit. Spol. c. Literas; de Consang. et Aff., cap. de Infidel.; de
Divert., tit. Gaudemus, quoted ib. pp. 80, 81.

[525] Letter to the Council of Ephesus. I have adopted the translation in
Allies' Church of England, from Fleury, xxv. 47, Oxf. Tr. Fleury observes, "Thus
Pope Celestine acknowledged that it was Christ Himself Who established Bishops
in the persons of the Apostles, as the teachers of His Church; he places himself
in their rank, and declares that they ought all to concur for the preservation
of the sacred deposit of Apostolic doctrine."

[526] Ib. The passage just precedes the former, which is its sequel.

[527] Ep. 120, ad Theod., quoted by Bossuet, Gall. Orthod., n. 60. 61.

[528] Ep. ad Eulog. Episc. Alex., lib. vii., quoted by Allies, Eng. Ch., &c., p.
347.

[529] Opp. T. iii., p. 632 A, quoted by Allies, p. 848.

[530] T. iii. 387 E, Ib. p. 349.

[531] Epp., lib. v., 43, ad Eulog., quoted Ib. p. 354.

[532] Ad Episc. Ill., lib. ix. 68. Allies, p. 355.

[533] Ad Sabinian., lib. v. 19, Ib.

[534] Ad Imp. Maur., lib. vii. 33. Allies, p. 356.

[535] Ad Imp. Maur., v. 20, Ib.

[536] Allies translated "per" "during," observing that S. Gregory used per, or
in, not a. It was in fact used, not by but in, the Council by two Alexandrian
Deacons who accused Dioscorus, and probably, as Van Espen conjectured (T. v.
477, Ib.), in opposition the like title given to Dioscorus, Archbishop of
Alexandria. Allies observes, however, "The title Ecumenical has been constantly
since, and is now borne by the Patriarch of Constantinople; no doubt a very
innocent meaning may be given it. The remarkable thing is, that Gregory has
pointed out in such plain unmistakable language a certain power and claim, which
he inferred, rightly or wrongly, would be set up on this title Ecumenical, and
which he pronounces to be a corruption of the whole constitution of the Church
"(Ib., p. 360), and that he and his predecessors repudiated it. Thomassin would
have it, that the Council, by its silence, authorized the title given in "those"
requests (i. 1. 11, Ib.). It is obviously unreasonable to argue any thing from
the fact that the Council did not interrupt the proceedings to protest against a
title occurring in a petition, and very capable of an innocent sense.

[537] Ep. ad Anastas., lib. vii. 27. Ib. 368. This, as Allies remarked, is
exactly the argument used for the infallibility of the Pope; i. e. that is
claimed for him, which S. Gregory the Great, being also on the same principle
infallible, rejected.

[538] Ad Euseb. viii. 30.

[539] Ep. ad Joann., Patr. Const, v. 18. Ib. p. 360.

[540] In Mansi, xix. 640. Allies, p. 363.

[541] In Mansi, xi. 1057. Allies, p. 381.

[542] Ep. 105, ad Pulcher. c. 3.

[543] In Mansi, xii. 1073. Ib., p. 399.

[544] Serm. v. de Nativ. Dom. Opp. i. 160. Par. 1675. Comp. S. Gregory I. (Mor.
in Job, 1. 18), "He alone was truly born holy, Who, that He might conquer
corrupt nature, was not conceived in the ordinary way."

[545] Epist. adv. Pelag. Hær. conc. x. p. 181, ed. Reg.

[546] In Solemn. Assump. Glor. semper Virg. M. Serm. 2. Opp. T. i. p. 161.
Colon. 1575.

[547] The whole passage is (on S. Luke i. 35, The Holy Ghost shall come upon
thee), "But forthwith the Holy Ghost came upon her; He had indeed before come
into her, when, in her mother's womb, He cleansed her soul from original sin;
but now too He came upon her, to cleanse her flesh from the fomes' of sin, that
she might be altogether without spot or wrinkle. That tyrant, then, of the
flesh, the sickness of nature, the fomes' of sin, as I think, He altogether
extinguished, that henceforth any motion from the law of sin should not be able
to arise in her members."--In Solemn. Purif. Glor. V. M. Serm. Unic., Opp. T. i.
p. 107.

[548] Printed in the Recueil, &c., pp. 294-7, from la Croce di Savoia.

[549] Introd. to Sermons on Eccl. Subj., 1863, p. 65.

[550] Dublin "Review," April, 1865, p. 441.

[551] "Let us return to the Bishops, and conclude that it is only ignorance and
grossness which made them think these seignories, united to their sees, were
useful to maintain religion. I only see the Roman Church, where one can find a
special reason for uniting the two powers. While the Ro man Empire lasted, it
contained in its vast extent nearly all Christianity; but after Europe was
divided among many princes independent of each other, if the Pope had been the
subject of any one of them, there would be ground to fear that the others would
have had difficulty in owning him as a common father, and that schisms would
have been frequent. One may believe then, that it was by a singular effect of
Providence that the Pope found himself independent and master of a state,
powerful enough not to be easily oppressed by other sovereigns; in order that he
might be the more free in the exercise of his spiritual power, and be able to
keep more easily the other Bishops within the bounds of their duty. This was the
thought of a great Bishop of our time."--Fleury, Disc. 4, sur 1'Hist. Eccl., n.
10.

[552] Fleury, Disc. 4, sur 1'Hist. Eccl., n. 9. --

[553] Ep. 8, ad Anastas.

[554] Ep. 243, 244.

[555] 1 Cor. vi. 12.

[556] Synes., Ep. 57, and 121.

[557] Hom. 85, in S. Matt.

[558] 1 Cor. vii. 33.

[559] The celebrated answer, which transferred the kingdom of France to Pepin,
would hardly be a precedent. "Burghard, Bishop of Wirzeburg, and Folrad,
Chaplain, were sent to Zachary Pope, asking as to the kings of France, who at
that time had not the royal power, if it were well or no. And Zachary Pope sent
word to Pepin, that it was better that he should be called king, who had the
power, than he who remained without royal power; that order might not be
disturbed, he commanded that Pepin should become king by Apostolic
authority."--(Annal. Lauriss., A. 749. Pertz, Mon. Germ. i. 136.) The next year,
"Pepin, according to the custom of the Franks, was elected king and anointed by
the hand of Archbishop Boniface of holy memory, and raised by the Franks to the
throne at Soissons. But Hilderic, who was fals ely called king, was shorn and
sent into a monastery,"--(ib. A. 750.) In return, Pepin made the Pope Patricius
of the Exarchate, yet under fealty to Pepin, and for the time owning the Greek
Emperor. (See authorities in Gieseler, Ser. 3, A. 1, c. 2, § 5.) This
arrangement could not be said to be by the Providence of God, in any other way,
than all acts of men are overruled by Him.

[560] The accurate writer, who reported this to me, observed in answer, "This
seems to me to be Llamaism."

[561] Pastoral, as published in "The Weekly Register," June 17.

[562] Recueil des Alloc. consist, encycliques, &c. Paris, 1865.

[563] See above. The inspiration must be extended to the writers of the Bulls
also.

[564] Encycl., 1849, "Ubi primum."

[565] "Ineffabilis," 1854.

[566] The argument of Narvaez, Exam. Bullæ Ineffabilis, p. 90.

[567] P. 1, q. 1, art. 10, in resp. ad arg. 1.

[568] Ep. c. Vincent. Donat. Narvaez quotes to the same end Acosta, a Jesuit,
"de Christo revelato," iii. 4.

[569] The writer of the "Ineffabilis" has applied to the Church at Rome, in
relation to the rest of the Catholic Church, which has the faith already, words
which Tertullian uses of the Church everywhere, in relation to those who, being
newly converted, had to receive the faith in the first instance. The writer of
the Constitution says, "Ex qua traducem fidei reliquæ omnes Ecclesiæ mutuentur
oportet." Tertullian says, "The Apostles founded Churches in every city, from
which the other Churches thenceforth borrowed the propagation of faith and seeds
of doctrine (a quibus traducem fidei et semina doctrinæ cæteræ exinde Ecclesiæ
muiuatæ sunt), and are daily borrowing them, that they may become Churches."--De
Præscr. c. 20, p. 468. Oxf. Tr. 9. See notes Ib.

[570] P. 3, q. 29, art. 2, arg. 3.

[571] Nat. Alex. H. E. Sæc. ii. Diss. 16, § 21.

[572] Nat. Al. ib.

[573] The above instances are furnished by the very remarkable wo rk of Narvaez,
"Professor of Theology in the Order of Preachers, and in the University of
Complutum" [Alcarade Henares] ,1858, "Examen Bullæ Ineffabilis, institution et
concinnatum juxta regulas sanioris theologiæ," Paris, 1858,--a detailed and just
criticism of "the writer of the Bull."

[574] "Adulando eos quasi æquiparare Deo." He is speaking of those who claimed
for the Pope the right to dispense with the degrees of kin prohibited by the
Levitical law. He calls them "Doctorculi." See Dr. Pusey's Evidence, &c., p. 35.

[575] It could only be under such strong conviction that Card. Wiseman said of
the Abp. of Paris, who died in recovering his people at the barricades, "he was
a mere Gallican."


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 2: NOTE A.
========================================================================

The Faith, according to the Fathers, is contained in Holy Scripture.

THE VIth Article does not touch upon the subject of the interpretation of Holy
Scripture. The questions, "Who is its interpreter? by what rules the
interpretation is to be guided? what is the value of tradition or of the consent
of antiquity in its interpretation? "are wholly outside of its scope. Nor again,
is it the question whether any things are true or right to be observed which are
grounded on tradition, without being contained in, or provable by, Holy
Scripture. The Article relates only to "Articles of Faith," and lays down the
duty not of individuals, but of the Church, not to require to be believed as an
Article of Faith, what cannot be proved by Holy Scripture. I have put down a few
passages from the fathers, stating or implying that the faith is contained in
Holy Scripture, as bearing out the Article, chiefly such as are quoted by
Beveridge on the Articles, in Archbishop Usher's Answer to a Jesuit (c. 2), and
in the notes on S. Athanasius against the Arians (Library of the Fathers). Some
I found in an American publication, taken, without acknowledgment, from Dean
Goode's laborious collection in his "Divine Rule of Faith and Practice," vol.
iii. pp. 29-211. From this I hare selected some few. A fuller list may be seen
in the work itself, with which, although written against us, we have, thus far,
no controversy; since the question between the school of Dean Goode and
ourselves was not, whether Holy Scripture is the ultimate source of faith (in
which we were always agreed), but whether it is its own interpreter.

The argument from tradition was pressed upon heretics by S. Irenæus and
Tertullian, that the Apostles committed orally their whole doctrine to the
Churches which they founded. S. Irenæus begins his full argument of the value of
tradition by asserting that what the Apostles delivered orally, that they wrote.
"Through no other have we known the plan of our salvation, than through them,
through whom the Gospel has come to us; which Gospel they then preached, but
afterwards by the will of God delivered us in the Scriptures, to be the
foundation and pillar of our faith." --iii. 1.1. In like way Tertullian: "What
we are, that are the Scriptures from the beginning; of them we are, before that
any thing existed contrary to what we are" [heresy],--De Præscr. c. 38, p. 489,
Oxf. Tr. And a little before, having given the beginning and end of the
Apostles' Creed, "She (the Church) joineth the law and the prophets with the
writings of the Evangelists and Apostles, and thence drinketh in her
faith."--Ib. § 37. And negatively, "Whether all things were made of any
subject-matter, I have as yet read nowhere. Let Hermogenes' shop show that it is
written. If it is not written, let them fear that woe alloted to such as add or
take away."--Adv. Herm. c. 22.

S. Clement of Alexandria,--"He hath ceased to abide a man of God and faithful to
the Lord, who hath kicked against the ecclesiastical tradition, and bounded off
to the opinions of human heresies; but he who hath returned from this deceit,
listening to the Scriptures, and turning back his life to the truth, is
perfected, being in a manner deified. For we have the Lord as the source of the
doctrine, guiding the true knowledge from beginning to end, in divers portions
and in divers manners,' through the Prophets, and the Gospel, and the Holy
Apostles. But if any think he needs any other first principle, that which is
indeed the first principle would not be kept. But he who is trustworthy in
himself may well be worthy of trust through the Scripture and voice of the Lord,
which, through the Lord, worketh to the good of man. For this [Scripture and
voice of the Lord] we use as a rule of judging and discovering things. But every
thing which is judged is as yet untrustworthy, before it is judged; so that what
hath need of being judged cannot be a first principle. With good reason then do
we, embracing by faith the first principle being undemonstrated, taking ex
abundanti the proofs concerning the first principle from the first principle
itself, and instructed by the voice of the Lord to the acknowledgment of the
truth. If it suffice not simply to express what we hold, but there is need to
establish what we say, we do not wait for testimony from men, but we accredit
the thing to be ascertained by the voice of the Lord, which is more trustworthy
than any demonstration, yea, rather is

the only demonstration. In which knowledge they who have only a simple knowledge
of the Scriptures are faithful.--But if those who go after heresies also venture
to use prophetic Scriptures,--first, they do not use all; secondly, not
perfectly; not as the body and context of the prophecy suggests, but selecting
what is said doubtfully, they draw it aside to their own opinions, plucking a
few sayings here and there, not attending to what is signified by them, but
using the bare phrases."--Strom, vii. pp. 890, 1, Pott.

S. Hippolytus,--"There is one God, Whom we do not know otherwise than from the
Holy Scriptures. For as, if any one would be disciplined in the wisdom of this
world, he could not obtain it without reading the doctrines of philosophers; so,
whoever of us would practise piety towards God, shall not learn it except from
the Divine Scriptures. Whatever, then, the Holy Scriptures set forth, let us
know; and whatever they teach, let us learn; and as the Father willeth to be
believed, so let us believe; and as He willeth the Son to be glorified, so let
us glorify Him; and as He willeth the Holy Ghost to be given, so let us receive
Him. Not according to our own will, nor according to our own sense, nor doing
violence to the things given by Him, but as He willed to teach us by the Holy
Scripture, so let us understand them."--c. Noet. n. 9, Opp. T. i., pp. 238, 9.

Origen,--"In the two Testaments every word appertaining to God may be sought and
discussed, and from them may all knowledge be obtained. But if there be any
thing, upon which Divine Scripture decideth not, no other third Scripture ought
to be received as an authority for any knowledge; but what remaineth we should
commit to the fire--i. e., reserve to God. For God doth not will that we should
know all things in this present life."--In Lev. Hom. v. n. 9, ii. 212, ed. De la
Rue.

S. Dionysius of Alexandria,--He praises the Millenarians of the Arsinoite, that
"very conscientiously and guilelessly, and with childlike hearts towards God,
they received the things established by proofs and teaching of the Holy
Scriptures."--In Euseb,, H. E. vii. 24.

S. Cyprian declares the agreement with Holy Scripture to be the test of genuine
tradition. "Whence is that tradition? Whether does it descend from the authority
of the Lord and the Gospel, or does it come from the injunctions and epistles of
the Apostles? For that we are to do what is written, God testifieth and
admonisheth, saying to Joshua, This book of the law shall not depart out of thy
mouth,' &c. (Jos. i. 8.) Likewise the Lord, sending His Apostles, directs that
the nations should be baptized and taught to observe all things whatsoever He
had commanded. If, then, it is commanded in the Gospels, or contained in the
Epistles or Acts of the Apostles, then be this holy and Divine tradition
preserved."--Ep. 74, ad Pomp., n. 2,

p. 261, Oxf. Tr.

"What presumption to prefer human tradition to Divine ordinances, and not to
perceive that God is displeased and angered, as often as human tradition relaxes
the Divine command" (citing Isa. xxix. 13; S. Matt. xv. 8, 9; S. Mark vii. 9; 1
Tim. vi. 3-5).

"It behoves the priests of God, who keep the Divine commandments, that, if the
truth has in any respect tottered and faltered, we should go back to our Lord as
our Head, and to the Evangelic and Apostolic tradition."--Ib. n. 13, p. 267.

S. Athanasius, admitted as a deacon to defend the faith at the Council of Nice,
who witnesses so often that the Church there declared what it had received,
states also the sufficiency of Holy Scripture:-- "Vainly then do they [the
Arians] run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the
faith's sake, for Divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a
Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for
the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter; but stated the doctrine so
exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by
them of the religion towards Christ announced in Divine Scripture."--Conc. Arim.
et Sel. c. i. § 8, p. 81, Oxf. Tr. See further, above, p. 43.

"Perhaps being refuted as touching the term Ingenerate also, they will say,
according to their evil nature, it behoved, as regards our Lord and Saviour
Jesus Christ also, to state from the Scriptures what is there written of Him,
and not to introduce un-Scriptural expressions.' Yes, it behoved, say I too; for
the tokens of truth are more exact as drawn from Scripture than from other
sources; but the ill disposition and the versatile and crafty irreligion of the
Eusebians, compelled the bishops, as I said before, to publish more distinctly
the terms which overthrow their irreligion."--Nicene Def. c. vii. § 6, p. 57,
Oxf. Tr.

"Such is their [the Arian] madness and temerity. But our faith is right, issuing
from Apostolic teaching and tradition of the fathers, confirmed from both the
New and Old Testament," which he proceeds to quote.--Ep. ad Adelph., § 6, T. i.
p. 914, 5, Ben.

"The holy and inspired Scriptures are sufficient of themselves for the preaching
of the truth, yet there are also many treatises of our blessed teachers composed
for this purpose."--Cont. Gent. init.

"Since Divine Scripture is more sufficient than any thing else, I recommend
persons who wish to know fully concerning these things (the doctrine of the
blessed Trinity) to read the Divine oracles."--Ad Ep. JEg. 4.

"The Scriptures are sufficient for teaching; but it is good for us to exhort
each other in the faith, and to refresh each other with discourses."--Vit. S.
Anton. 16.

S. Cyril of Jerusalem, having given a summary of the Creed, adds, "This seal
have thou ever on thy mind, which now by way of summary has been touched on in
its heads, and, if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our
power, with Scripture-proofs. For concerning the Divine and most sacred
Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark
without the Holy Scriptures, nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the
artifices of argument. Do not then believe me, because I tell you these things,
unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth; for
this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by
proof from the Holy Scriptures."--Lect. iv. § 17, p. 42, Oxf. Tr.

"Take thou and hold that faith only as a learner and in profession, which is by
the Church delivered to thee, and is established from all Scripture, For since
all cannot read the Scriptures, but some, as being unlearned, others by
business, are hindered from the knowledge of them; in order that the soul may
not perish for lack of instruction, in the Articles which are few we comprehend
the whole doctrine of the Faith. This I wish you to remember even in the very
phrase, and to rehearse it with all diligence among yourselves, not writing it
on paper, but by memory graving it on your heart as on a monument.

"This I wish you to keep all through your life as a provision for the way, and
besides this to receive no other ever: whether we ourselves should change and
contradict what we now teach; or some opposing Angel, transformed into an Angel
of light, should aim at leading you astray. For though we or an Angel from
heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let them be
accursed.' And for the present, commit to memory the Faith, merely listening to
the words; and expect at the fitting season the proof of each of its parts from
the Divine Scriptures. For the Articles of the Faith were not composed at the
good pleasure of men; but the most important points, chosen from all Scripture,
make up the one teaching of the Faith. And, as the mustard-seed in a little
grain contains many branches, thus also this Faith, in a few words, hath
enfolded in its bosom the whole knowledge of godliness contained both in the Old
and New Testaments. Behold, therefore, brethren, and hold the traditions' which
ye now receive, and write them on the table of your hearts.'"--Lect. v. § 12, p.
58, Oxf. Tr.

S. Hilary, in rejecting a statement from the Book of Enoch:-- "Let us pass by
this. For the things which are not contained in the book of the law, we ought
not even to know" (in Ps. 132, n. 6), and in the context of the celebrated
passage in which he speaks of the abuse of Holy Scripture by heretics, he said
to Constantius, "In so far I truly admire thee, Lord Emperor Constantius, for
thy blessed and religious wish, in that thou desirest the faith only according
to that which is written, and hastening, as is meet, to the very words of the
Only-Begotten God, that your breast, which can contain an Emperor's cares, may
also be filled with the Divine words. This whoso rejecteth is Anti-Christ, and
whoso doth it in pretence, is anathema. But this one thing I ask--that in the
presence of the Synod (of Constantinople), which is now at variance about the
faith, thou wouldest vouchsafe to hear me as to the Evangelic Scriptures, that I
may speak with thee in the words of my Lord Jesus Christ, whose exile or Bishop
I am,--'God,' according to the prophet, beholdeth him who is humble and
trembleth at His word.' Emperor, thou seekest the faith; hear it, not out of new
writings, but out of the Books of God."--Ad Const. Aug. ii. n. 8.

S. Epiphanius,--"The children of the Church have received from their holy
Fathers, that is, the holy Apostles, to guard the faith; and withal to deliver
and preach it to their own children. . . . Cease not, faithful and orthodox men,
thus to speak, and to teach the like from the Divine Scriptures, and to walk,
and

to catechize, to the confirmation of yourselves and those who hear you; namely,
that holy faith of the Catholic Church, as the holy and only Virgin of God
received its custody from the holy Apostles of the Lord; and thus, in the case
of each of those who are under catechizing, who are to approach the holy Layer,
ye ought not only to preach faith to your children in the Lord, but also to
teach them expressly, as your common mother teaches, to say, We believe in one
God,'" &c., adding the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed in full.--Ancorat. 120,
T. ii. p. 122.

S. Optatus,--"Why knock at heaven, when we have a Testament here in the Gospel?
For here things earthly may be rightly compared with things heavenly. The case
is, as when a Father, having many sons, as long as he is with them, himself
directs them, a Testament is not yet necessary. So Christ, as long as He was
present on earth (although now, too, He fails us not), for the time commanded
the Apostles whatever was necessary. But as an earthly father, when he feels
himself on the verge of death, fearing lest, after his death, the brothers
should quarrel and go to law, calls witnesses, and transfers his will from his
dying breast to tables which shall long endure, and, if any contention arises
among the brothers, they do not go to the tomb, but ask for the Testament, and
he who resteth in the tomb speaketh silently from the tables,--He Whose is the
Testament is alive in heaven. So then let His Will be sought in the Gospel as in
a Testament."--(As to the re-baptising of Heretics.)--De Schism. Don. v. 3.

S. Basil, in his treatise on the faith, sets out with saying, "What I have
learnt from the God-inspired Scripture, this would I set before you as is
pleasing unto God. I have thought it suited to our common end, in the simplicity
of a sound faith, to fulfil the desire of your love in Christ, saying what I
have been taught from the God-inspired Scripture, being sparing as to names and
words, which are not actually introduced into the Divine Scripture, yet which
preserve that meaning which lieth in Scripture. But those which, besides the
language being foreign to Scripture, had a meaning also foreign to it, and which
cannot be found used by the saints, these I shrank from altogether, as foreign
and alien to godly faith. For faith is an unhesitating assent to the things
which we have heard in the fulness of the truth of the things preached by the
grace of God. But if the Lord is faithful in all His words,--it is a manifest
falling from faith, and sin of pride, either to reject any thing written, or to
introduce any thing unwritten, since the Lord Jesus Christ saith, My sheep hear
My voice, and a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him, for they
know not the voice of strangers;' and the Apostle, under an example taken from
men, strongly forbiddeth to add or take away any thing in the God-inspired
Scriptures, in that he says, Now a man's covenant, when confirmed, no man
annulleth or addeth thereunto.'" De Fide, n. 1, Opp. ii. 223, 224.

"What then our Fathers said, we too say, that the Glory is common to the Father
and the Son, wherefore we present our giving of glory to the Father with the
Son. But this doth not suffice us, that it is the tradition of the Fathers. For
they too followed the mind of the Scripture, taking as their first principle
those testimonies which, a little while ago, we set before you from the
Scripture."--De Spir. S. c. 7, n. 16,

T. iii. p. 13.

And, though not speaking of faith, he gives it as a rule, "That every word or
thing ought to be confirmed by testimony of God-inspired Scripture, to the full
conviction of the good and the shaming of the evil."--Reg. 26. Ib. ii. p. 256.

"What is the character of faith? An unhesitating conviction of the truth of the
God-inspired words. What is the character of the faithful? With the same
conviction to embrace the meaning of what is said, and not to venture to annul
or to add. For if every thing which is not of faith is sin, as the Apostle says,
and faith is from hearing, and hearing through the Word, every thing which is
without the God-inspired Scripture, being not of faith, is sin."--Reg. 80, c.
22. Ib. p. 317.

S. Gregory of Nyssa,--"I think we ought to inquire, over and above what has been
said, whether the God-inspired teachings agree with these things.' She said, And
who would contradict this, that that alone is to be set down as truth, to which
the seal of the teaching of the Gospel is added?'"--De Anima et Res. T iii. p.
207.

"But since with them [the philosophers], the theory as to the soul was carried
out at their own pleasure, according to what seemed to them consequential, but
we have no such power of saying whatever we will, seeing that we use Holy
Scripture as a canon and law of all doctrine, we, of necessity, looking to it,

receive that alone which agreeth with the purport of what is written."-- Ib. p.
201.

"Since the God-inspired testimony is the safe criterion of truth as to every
doctrine, I think it well to accredit our teaching too by annexation of the
Divine."--c. Eunom, L. i. T. ii. p. 346.

"That God here (Gen. xi.) addressed the ministering Angels, since it is rested
on no testimony of Scripture, we have rejected as false."--De Cognit. Dei, in
Euthym. Panopl. Tit. 8, B. P. T. 19, p. 49.

S. Ambrose,--"What we do not find in Holy Scripture, how can we use?" [not of
doctrine].--De Off. i. 23, § 102.

"Why labour we so much for the world--who ought to serve no other save this
Lord? Here then there is no second [as the Arians called our Lord]. I adduce
this testimony. I read that He is first; I read that He is not second. Let those
who say that He is second show it by Scripture."--De. Inst. Virg. c. xi. § 70,
ii. 265, Ben.

"They say, that the Son is unlike' the Father; we deny it; yea, rather, we are
horrified at the word. But I would not have you trust my argument, sacred
Emperor, or my discussion. Let us interrogate the Scriptures; let us interrogate
the Apostles; let us interrogate the Prophets; let us interrogate Christ."--De
Fide, i. 6, n. 41, T. ii. p. 451.

"I wish not to be myself believed; let Scripture be recited."-- De Inc. Dom.
Sacr. c. 3, n. 14. ii.

706.

S. Jerome,--"But as we do not deny what is written, so what is not written we
reject. That God was born of a Virgin, we believe, because we read. That Mary
married after that Birth we believe not, because we read not."--Adv. Helvid. §
19, Opp. ii. 222, Vail.

"The doctrine of the Church, which is the house of God, is found in the fulness
of the Divine Scriptures."--Ep. 30, ad Paulam, § 6, i. 147.

"Other things, too, which they [the heretics] find and invent without the
authority and testimonies of the Scriptures, as if by Apostolical tradition, the
sword of God [i. e. His living Word] strikes through."-- On Hagg. i. 11, T. vi.
p. 749.

"The Church of Christ, which hath a goodly dwelling-place, and possesseth
Churches in the whole world, is conjoined by unity of spirit, and hath the
cities of the Law, the Prophets, the Gospel, the Apostles, hath not gone forth
from her boundaries, i. e. the Holy Scriptures, but retains the possession which
she took."--In Mic. i. 10, T. vi. pp. 444, 5.

"That treasure, in which are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,
is either God the Word, Who seemeth hidden in the flesh of Christ, or Holy
Scripture, in which is laid up the knowledge of the Saviour."--In S. Matt. xiii.
44, T. vii. 97.

"It is asked how God made known to us the mystery of His will in all wisdom and
knowledge. And first this is to be taken simply, that the mystery of His will is
our redemption through the Blood of His Son, and remission of sins according to
the riches of His grace, wherewith He hath abounded in us. Then that through His
Scriptures He hath made known to us all mysteries, how He first made heaven and
earth, and all things therein," &c.--In Ep. ad Eph. i. 9, p. 555.

Theophilus of Alexandria,--[Origen] "not knowing that it is the suggestion of a
dæmoniacal spirit to follow the sophism of human minds, and to think any thing
Divine outside of the authority of the Scriptures."--Epist. Pasch. i. (96 among
S. Jerome's), § 6, T. i. p. 560, Vail.

"It is one thing, if they can teach out of the Scriptures that Go d the "Word
had His Soul before He was born of Mary, and that it was called His Soul before
He took flesh. But if they are constrained by the authority of the Scriptures
and reason itself, to admit that Christ had not a soul before He was born of
Mary (for at the assumption of man, His Soul also was assumed), they are plainly
convicted of saying that the same soul was, and was not, His. But let these
madmen cease from the impiety of new dogmas. Let us, following the rule of the
Scriptures, proclaim, with entire confidence of heart, that neither His flesh
nor His soul were, before He was born of Mary."--Ep. Pasch. ii. n. 8 (Ep. 98 in
S. Jer.), i. 585.

Rufinus,--After giving the catalogue of the Books of the Old and New Testament,
he says: "These are they which the Fathers included within the canon, and out of
which they willed the assertions of our faith to be established."--Comm. in
Symb. Apost. § 37, p. 110, ed. Vallars.

"These things have been delivered unto us by the Fathers, which, as I said, it
seemed opportune to set down in this place for the instruction of those who are
receiving the first elements of the Church and of the faith, that they may know
from what fountains they are to draw the draughts of the Word of God."--Ib. §
38, p. 101.

Perhaps Gregory of Bætica, anyhow before S. Augustine,--"Since, then, thou
knowest this unity of substance in the Father and the Son, by authority, not
only of the Prophets, but of the Gospel also, how sayest thou that the omoousion
is not found in the Divine Scriptures, as though the omoousion were any other
than what He saith, I came forth from the Father,' and I and the Father are
one,' or what the Prophets plainly intimated as to the Substance of God?"--De
Fide Orthod. c. 5, App. S. Ambr. ii. pp. 351,

2.

S. Augustine,--Albeit the Lord Jesus did many things, not all are written; as
this same S. John the Evangelist testifies that the Lord Christ both said and
did many things which are not written: only those were selected to be written
which were seen to suffice for the salvation of them that believe."--Hom. 49, in

S. John, § 1, p. 649, Oxf. Tr.

And after enumerating the books of Holy Scripture, "In all these books, they who
fear God and are meek through piety, seek the "Will of God. Of this work and
labour the first observance is, to know those books, if not so as to understand
them, yet by reading either to commit them to memory, or at least not to be
altogether unacquainted with them. Then those things which are set down plainly
in them, whether precepts as to life, or rules of faith, are to be searched into
diligently and wisely; of these any one will find the more, in proportion to his
capacity and intelligence. For in those things which are set down plainly in the
Scriptures, are found all things which contain faith in the way of life, i. e.,
hope and charity."--De Doctr. Christ, ii. 9, § 14.

"He made the authors of the Divine Scriptures the mountains of Israel. Feed
there, that ye may find safety. Whatsoever ye hear thence, let that savour well
unto you; whatsoever is without, reject. Wander not in the mist; hear the voice
of the Shepherd; gather yourselves to the mountains of Holy Scripture; there are
the delights of your heart; there is nothing poisonous, nothing alien; it is a
most rich pasture; do ye only come sound yourselves."--Serm. 46, de Past. c. 11,
§ 24, Opp. v. 238.

"He, having spoken first by the Prophets, then by Himself, afterwards by the
Apostles, as much as He judged to be sufficient, formed also the Scripture
which, is called Canonical, of most eminent authority, which we trust as to
those things, which it is not expedient to be ignorant of, and which yet we are
not equal to know of ourselves."--De Civ. Dei, xi. 3, T. vii. p. 273.

"It [the city of God] believes the Holy Scriptures, both the Old and the New,
which we call Canonical, from which the faith itself is derived whereby the just
liveth, by which we walk without doubting, so long as we are absent from the
Lord; which being safe and certain, we may without just blame doubt as to some
things, which we have not perceived by sense or reason, and which have not
become evident to us by Canonical Scriptures, nor have come to our knowledge by
witnesses whom it were absurd to disbelieve."--Ib. xix. 18. Ib. p. 562.

"Being about to speak of the day of the last Judgment of God, we ought first to
lay down the divine testimonies as the foundation of the building."--Ib. xx. 1,
Ib. p. 562.

"Read this to us from the Law, from the Prophets, from the Psalms, from the
Gospel itself, from the Apostolic Epistles; read, and we believe."--De Unit.
Eccles. c. 6, ix. 345.

"Accordingly, whether as to Christ or as to His Church, or any other thing which
belongs to your faith and life, I say not we' (seeing we are in no wise to be
compared to him who said although we'), but I say what he added, if an angel
from heaven preach to you any thing besides what ye have received,' in the
Scriptures of the Law and the Gospel, let him be anathema."--c. litt. Petil.
iii. 6, T. ix. p. 301.

S. Chrysostome,--"With good cause He calleth the Scriptures a door,' for they
bring us to God, and open to us the knowledge of God; they make us sheep, they
guard us, and suffer not wolves to come in after us. For Scripture, like some
sure door, barreth the way against heretics, placing us in a state of safety as
to all which we desire, and not allowing us to wander; and if we undo it not, we
shall not easily be conquered by our foes. By it we can know all, both those
which are, and those which are not shepherds. But

what is into the fold?' It refers to the sheep and the care of them. For he that
useth not the Scriptures, but climbeth up some other way, i. e. who cutteth out
for himself another and an unusual way, the same is the thief.' Seest thou from
this too, that Christ agreeth with the Father, in that He bringeth forward the
Scriptures? On which account also He said to the Jews, Search the
Scriptures,'"&c.--Hom. 59, on S. John

x. 1, p. 513, Oxf. Tr.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable, &c. For
doctrine.' If we ought to learn or be ignorant of any thing, thence shall we
know it; if to disprove what is false, this too thence; if to be corrected and
taught wisdom--that is, if any thing is lacking and hath to be added, that the
man of God may be perfect,' he saith, to this end was the exhortation of
Scripture. Thou hast, he says, the Scriptures instead of me: if thou wiliest to
learn any thing, thence mayest thou. But if he wrote these things to Timothy,
who was filled with the Spirit, how much more to us! Thoroughly perfected to all
good works,' he saith, not simply partaking, but thoroughly and. accurately
furnished."--On 2 Tim. Hom. ix. § 1, T. xi. pp. 714, 715.

S. Isidore of Pelusium,--"That these things are so, let us look into the canon
of truth, I mean the Divine Scriptures. "What then saith it?"--Epist. L. iv. Ep.
114, p. 475. "The teaching as to the fall [of souls, i. e. Origen's] not being
true, I deem, yet seeming to be plausible, many other things appear to
overthrow, but two especially, in my judgment: one, that it is not clearly
taught in the Scriptures."--Ib. 163, against Origen, beg. p. 504.

S. Cyril of Alexandria,--"We say that the fountains of salvation are the holy
Prophets, Evangelists, and Apostles, who cause to gush forth on the world the
saving word which is from above and from heaven, the Holy Spirit supplying them,
and gladden the whole under heaven."--De Recta Fide, ad Reg. ii. init. Opp. v.
2, c. p. 128.

"Since we must needs follow the Holy Scriptures, nowhere going out of the track
of what they prescribe, let us say, in what way God the Father is said to crown
the Son with glory."--Ib. p. 168.

"Those who oppose must either condemn to disgrace those of old, and call those
who taught the world the mysteries of the faith, false teachers, to whom Christ
Himself said, Go, teach all nations;' or if they shudder at this, they must
choose to be right-minded about Christ, and bidding farewell to their own
ignorances, hold fast to the Holy Scriptures, and following the inerrant path of
the saints, go straight to the Truth itself."--De Recta Fid. ad Imp. p. 6.

"A. What right-minded person can fail to see, my friend, that you bale up empty
words and heap up a cold profitless multitude of ideas, unless you point out the
writings of the saints as harmonizing with what you say? For we will follow, not
those who will and are wont to pour out of their own ideas, but those who speak
from the mouth of the Lord, as is written. B. Thou sayest right. Well, then,
Divine David sang," &c.--De S. Trin, Dial. iii. T. v. 1, p. 477.

"It is best then, O Hermias, not to be flurried with the petulances of others,
since they would lead us to an undistinguishing mind, but to make the words of
the Divine speakers the straight and unswerving rule of faith. For it must be
right to accept no others than these self-same, and to say, It is not ye who
speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.'"--Ib. Dial, iv.
init. p. 504.

Taken in part from S. Cyril, but later:--"Creation itself, and its preservation
and government, proclaim the greatness of the Divine Nature. And first through
the law and the prophets, then through His only-begotten Son our Lord and God
and Saviour Jesus Christ, He hath made manifest the knowledge of Himself
according to our capacity. All things then which are delivered to us through the
law and the prophets and Apostles we receive, and know, and confess, not seeking
any thing beyond them. For it is impossible to say or even conceive any thing
about God, besides what has been Divinely said to us by the Divine oracles of
the Old and New Testament."--De Sacrosancta Trinitate, init. Opp. T. vi. P. 3,
p. 2.

Theodoret,--"From this we are taught not to quench the Spirit, but to stir up
the grace which we have received, and to introduce nothing alien into Holy
Scripture, but to be content with the teaching of the Spirit, and to abominate
heresies, of which some have added fables to the Divine word, others have
preferred their ungodly thoughts to the mind of Scripture."--Queestt. in Lev. 9.
9.

Orth.--"Bring me not human thoughts or syllogisms. For I obey the Divine
Scripture alone."--

Dial. c. x. T. iv. p. 18, Sch.

Eran.--"How could one argue with those who deny the taking of the flesh, or the
soul, or the mind, except by producing the proofs from the Divine Scripture? And
how could one refute those who strain to lessen the Divinity of the
Only-Begotten, than by showing that Holy Scripture spake some things as to His
Divinity, others as to the Incarnation? Orth.--This saying is true. For it is
ours; nay, rather that of all who have kept the Apostolic rule unbent."--Dial.
ii. p. 113.

"I would not say it, persuaded by human reasonings. For I am not so rash as to
say any thing on which Divine Scripture is silent."--Ib. p. 122.

S. Proclus,--"Let faith, being the head of all virtues, remain unadulterated,
introducing nothing spurious from human reasonings, nor defiled by profane
novelties of words, but remaining within the bounds of the Gospels and Apostles,
no one venturing to discuss any thing amiss in addition to that whereby we have
been saved, and which, in Baptism, we subscribed with our tongue. For the
sublimity of faith repels every attack and venture of presumption, not only of
man, but even if carried aloft by any spiritual nature, the blessed Paul crying
aloud, If we or an angel from heaven preach to you any other Gospel than what ye
have received, let him be anathema.' Let us guard then with vigilance what we
have received, keeping the eye of the soul open and steadily fixed on the
treasure of faith. What, then, have we received from the Scriptures, but
altogether this, that God created the universe by the Word?"--Epist. ad Arm.
App. conc. Eph. iii. 1740, 1, Col.

S. Leo,--"Into this folly they fall, who, when they are hindered by some
obscurity from knowing the truth, betake themselves, not to the voices of the
Prophets, not to the writings of the Apostles, not to the authorities of the
Gospels, but to themselves. And therefore they became teachers of error, because
they had not been disciples of the truth. For what additional instruction did he
acquire from the Divine books of the Old and New Testament, who did not grasp
even the beginning of the Creed?"--Ep. 28, ad Flavian.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 3: NOTE B.
========================================================================

Doubts among the Roman Catholic Bishops, as to making the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin an Article of faith.

In giving more fully the answers of some of the Bishops, who demurred to,
doubted about, or objected to, the definition of the doctrine of the Immaculate
Conception of the Blessed Virgin as an Article of faith, it is right to premise
two points: 1. That no one of them objected to the definition, on the ground
that he did not himself believe in it. All had been educated from infancy in
that belief, as much as in the belief in the Holy Trinity or the Incarnation;
they had been taught it in the seminaries; they held it undoubtingly. 2. All
were ready to submit their own opinion as to the expediency of making it a
matter of faith to the authority of the Pope, and to receive what he decreed as
"de fide." They are then opinions which have passed away, since the doubts or
objections were ignored. Yet they have an historical interest, as showing how
the subject was looked upon by some distinguished Bishops, how the influence of
Roman decisions upon those who are not in their communion was felt by some; what
principles were held by some as to the evidence required to establish an Article
of faith, or what evidence was supposed to exist as to this, and, in part
perhaps, what hopes may be entertained of meeting upon common principles.

France.--1. The late Archbishop of Paris, embodying the opinion of his
predecessor. His full answer was written Aug. 25, 1849 (Pareri, &c., ii. 26-45),
but withheld until Dec. 17, 1850 (Par. iii. 338). On July 26, 1850, he wrote, "I
have consulted the gravest men, the most able theologians of my diocese. I have
subsequently myself examined and weighed all things before God with the greatest
care. From all this has resulted a work of which the conclusions are--

"1) In conformity with the principles of theology, the Immaculate Conception of
the most holy Virgin is not a matter which can be defined as a truth of the
Catholic faith, and, in no case, can be imposed as a belief obligatory under
pain of eternal damnation.

"2) That any definition whatsoever, even if the Church or the Holy See believed
that they could frame it, would not be opportune; for it would add nothing to
the glory of the Immaculate Virgin, and it might be hurtful to the peace of the
Church and the good of souls, especially in my diocese."--Par. iii. 310,

11. His letter of Aug. 25, 1849, which was sent four months later than the
above, ran-- "It was my first care (your Holiness suggested afterwards to the
Venerable Cardinal of Bourges) to

call into council the gravest men and most learned theologians of my diocese.
They wrote a dissertation hereon, conspicuous for learning and wisdom, which I
have judged right to transmit to you, most Blessed Father, at length.
Afterwards, I weighed diligently the matter before God, and will humbly explain
my opinion to the supreme judgment of the Vicar of Christ. The Encyclical letter
of your Blessedness, most Holy Father, raised two questions, the first whereof
must be solved by learning, the other by prudence:

"1st. As the theologians, my counsellors, observe, it must be inquired whether,
according to the principles of sound theology, the doctrine of the Immaculate
Conception of the Most Holy Virgin can be solved by a decree of the Church or of
the Holy See, whereby the faithful should be bound to embrace this doctrine:

"2dly. Whether it is opportune to publish such a decree now.

"As to the dogmatic question, the authors of the Dissertation lay down, 1) that
the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception can be enacted by a decree of the
Church or of the Holy See, so as to be declared certain, yet not so as to be
accounted among articles of faith; 2) that the Immaculate Conception of the Most
Holy Virgin cannot, as they think, be placed among articles of faith or truths
of the Catholic faith, by a decree of the Church or the Holy See.

"As to prudence, having weighed the advantages and disadvantages of a solemn
decree, whereby all the faithful should be bound to embrace the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception, they think such a promulgation altogether inopportune.
And I myself, mo st Holy Father, as well as the theologians, my counsellors,
think that from the promulgation of such a decree the most grave disadvantages,
and perhaps great calamities, will arise to the Church. And I myself think with
them, that it is not lawful, either for the Church or for the Holy See to count
the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception in any case among the articles of
faith, or verities of the Catholic faith. Yea, most Holy Father, I go further
than the said theologians, and doubt whether the Church or the Holy See can
enact by a solemn decree, that this doctrine is certain and must be embraced by
all under pain of eternal damnation. The Advisers think that their judgment can
be easily demonstrated by those grounds which theologians are wont to employ to
establish the doctrine as to the Immaculate Conception of the Most Holy Virgin.
For, as these say, setting aside the testimonies of the Holy Fathers, who
flourished in the first ages of the Church, whose explanation lies under no
slight difficulties, the truth of the Immaculate Conception is demonstrated by
most grave theological reasons, which rest especially on the glorious privilege
of the Divine maternity, and the constant practice of the Church for the last
five centuries.

"I will presently, most Blessed Father, set forth several doubts as to the force
of these reasons, which, moreover, are reducible to the single ground of
convenience. But for the time, admitting the gravity of this argument, I would
explain modestly, and not without some fear, the following doubts."--[The
original contains answers, enforcing these doubts. These I have omitted, when
they seemed to be involved in the terms of the doubt itself, or were nearly
identical in terms with it:--]

"Doubt 1. Can the Church make a definition as to a doctrine, which rests neither
on Holy Scripture nor Tradition?

"D. 2. Can any thing else be inferred from the passages adduced from the Fathers
of the earlier centuries, besides the sanctification of Mary from her mother's
womb? [He instanced such expressions as Immaculate,' Most pure,' Free from stain
of sin,' which, he says, were used by S. Bernard, or S. Thomas Aquinas too, who
denied the Immaculate Conception.]

"D. 3. Can the Church, when it exceeds the limits of her authority, declare any
truth as certain, on the sole ground of intrinsic suitableness?

"D. 4. Is the Church bound by no limit of lawfulness in the exercise of her
authority, so that she can make a definition in all possible cases, in all
circumstances, at her own will?

"D. 5. Did the Church without evident necessity, ever define a question of
doctrine as to which, here and now, no controversy is raised? Would not the
practice of Councils and the Holy See be contradicted by so doing?

"D. 6. Are the wishes of the faithful a sufficient motive that the Church
should, by a solemn decision, settle a question of doctrine in their sense? [One
of the most learned Bishops of Belgium, who extremely desires the doctrinal
decision, confessed to me, that this practice of the Church seemed to him of so
much moment, that on this ground alone he somewhat hesitated.']

"D. 7. Can the Church propose as obligatory an opinion as to doctrine, which is
not necessarily connected with any revealed dogma?

"D. 8. Can the Church define, either as de Fide,' or as infallibly certain, a
proposition which cannot be brought under theological conclusions? [He explains,
Among the truths which the Church teaches with infallible authority, the last
place is held by those which are contained in theological conclusions, i. e.,
such as are deduced from a major proposition, not revealed, and a minor,
revealed. Such conclusions then must be connected by some necessary and evident
link with some verity of faith. But the Immaculate Conception is not so
connected.']

"D. 9. Can the Church define, as certainly to be believed, a truth which does
not touch upon the economy of religion?

"D. 10. Can the Church propose, under pain of eternal damnation, a doctrine
which is altogether indifferent, in respect of dogma or rule of life?

"D. 11. Was it not always the mind of the Council of Trent to maintain liberty
of opinions which

do not injure dogma or morals?

"D. 12. As to the Immaculate Conception itself, did not the Holy Council of
Trent and the Holy See decree that opinions were free, and so, in themselves,
indifferent?

"D. 13. After the Church has declared, at least implicitly, that neither of
these opinions affects dogma or rules of life, would it not, by defining that
the one was necessarily to be believed and anathematizing the other, seem to
confess that it had erred, in tolerating error in its bosom?

"D. 14. Would not a new decision presuppose fresh grounds? But whence have these
arisen? [From the "pious wishes" of the faithful perchance?']

"D. 15. Failing testimonies of Scripture or tradition, can a doctrinal decision
rest on pious wishes of the faithful?

"D. 16. Failing texts of Scripture, or Apostolic tradition, what else will the
testimonies of Bishops be, save a new weighing of theological grounds in favour
of the Immaculate Conception?

"D. 17. Can a new judgment, as to the value of theological grounds, be prudently
passed without a new controversy, which however has not been raised?

"D. 18. But why this new controversy, if the question has been solved by the
Council of Trent and the Holy See?

"D. 19. After a decree, declaring that opinions as to the Immaculate Conception
are free, who will dare to assert the contrary?

"D. 20. Can a more vivid sense of some reason of theological congruity, even if
it affected the mind of all the Bishops of the Catholic world unanimously, be a
sufficient ground for a doctrinal decision?

"D. 21. "What weight is there in the ground of congruity, whereon alone the
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception rests?

"D. 22. Does not God destroy all those reasons of congruity by the mystery of
the Incarnation?

"D. 23. Why, in such a mystery of the self-emptying of the Word, should there be
any dispute as to the one or other degree of humility?

"D. 24. Might not perhaps the ground of congruence be brought forward more truly
to prove that the Virgin Mary was sanctified in her mother's womb?

"D. 25. If some Theologians hold that the dogma of the Divine Maternity is
connected by a bond of mere congruence with the Immaculate Conception of the
Virgin, do not others contrariwise teach that it contradicts several revealed
dogmas?

"D. 26. In matter of revealed religion, before the authority of the Church
pronounces decisively, must it not first be examined, whether the difficulties
both of sacred and profane knowledge can be solved? [Dismissing the difficulties
of modern physiology, he asks,]

"D. 37. If, by a special grace, the fruit of human generation can be holy,
immaculate, free from all fault, why was not Christ so born? [He says, The
learned Bishop whom I mentioned, when urged by this argument, did not hesitate
to assert that the Fathers only hinted a certain necessity of propriety, when
they speak of the Virginity of the Mother of God being necessary, and that in
truth the Son of God might have taken flesh in the ordinary way of generation. I
doubt not f hat that pious Bishop, on weighing the matter more maturely, would
acknowledge that such a concession was altogether contrary to the doctrine of
the Church. All testimonies of tradition, I deem, contradict it.']

"D. 28. Would not Christ have been united with us by a closer bond of
brotherhood, if born of man and woman, had this been possible, as is supposed in
the opinion of the Immaculate Conception?

"D. 29. Is any special teaching for the forming of life derivable from that
mystery, so that a definition could be judged, if not necessary, at least
useful?

"D. 30. Do they not do wrong to the Blessed Virgin, who expect singular and
illustrious graces from the decree as to the Immaculate Conception? [Such as,
that there should hereafter be no foreign wars, no civil discord, the empire of
error be destroyed; everywhere truth, peace, and charity.' When they exhibit to
us the Blessed Virgin rejoicing in such honour, and therefore exulting, that we
acknowledge her singular privilege, and, as a reward, taking care to pour most
copious treasures of her gifts into the Church, do they not clothe the Queen of
the heavenly Court with the failings of our infirmities? Do they not

represent her as a woman, desirous of vain glory, to whose feet each makes his
way by flattery and blandishments? These things, if not vain phrenzies, are
invented to the reproach of the Virgin.']

"D. 31. Will not the doctrinal decision, contrary to the mind of the Church,
diminish the cultus and glory of the Blessed Virgin?

"D. 32. The doctrinal decision will profit neither the faithful nor the Church,
nor the glory of the holy Mother of God.

"D. 33. Will not the Dissenters mock the Church for such a solemn decision, and
be repelled further from it?

"D. 34. Perils, which will arise thence, in respect to the unbelievers and
politicians of this time.

"D. 35. Perils, which will arise thence in respect to some faithful, especially
in the Diocese of Paris. [These, though they neglect the precepts of religion,
yet profess to reverence its doctrines. Their faith, philosophic (so to speak)
rather than Christian, will be too weak to bear such a trial. We fear, lest they
should reject what they have hitherto venerated, or at least remove further from
the Church. These perils are especially to be feared in the diocese' of Paris.
There are to be found in Paris, more than anywhere else, men eminent for civil
dignity, or science, or wealth, or authority, who by their example affect
others, and whom we are constrained to count in this class. Moved thereby, my
predecessor of glorious memory' (the Archbishop who died as a martyr) gave the
same opinion as myself to the Holy See, asserting that the definition as to the
Immaculate Conception would be rather a scandal than to edification among those
of his Diocese.']

"D. 36. Perils, which will arise as to some Catholic Theologians. [These will
endure anxiously this new head of controversy, this new definition which can be
confirmed by no tradition, nay, which, as many learned among them think, is at
variance with the belief of former centuries of the Church. Which peril, if it
be lighter on the part of those who listen tractably to the Church, will appear
much graver, if we consider those who profess to reject the heretics who
condemned in modern times, yet tread closely in their footsteps. Such perchance
may be found among us.']

"D. 37. Will not new heresies arise out of a doctrinal decision? [Probably
"Anti-conceptionists" will arise, and some of them will not hesitate to assert
that the assistance of the Holy Spirit was not promised to the Church, to settle
at pleasure mere theoretical questions. What marvel, if among the adherents of
the new dogma, some, of more rigid minds, resting on the grounds I have hinted
at [Doubts 27, 28], should come to deny the Virginity of Mary, and the operation
of the Holy Ghost in the Incarnation?']

"D. 38. Will not the decision of the question turn to the ruin of a great number
of souls without any compensation?

"The wishes of the faithful, that the pious opinion of the Immaculate Conception
should be counted among dogmas of faith, or at least among truths defined as
certain, are incessantly produced to us as a decisive ground. They who so boast,
most Blessed Father, exceed the limits of truth. To us the faithful seem to have
no wish as to this definition. They are contented to pour forth devout prayers
to the Immaculate Virgin. If any pious souls, more inclined to that faith, have
uttered such a wish, they are, beyond question, very few. But be they, in
respect to the unbelieving, heretics, or indifferent, as one, I do not say, to a
thousand, but to a hundred, the piety or faith of this faithful soul will profit
nothing by that definition, if it turn to the destruction of those hundred
unbelievers, heretics, indifferentists. Why, without reasonable or sufficient
motive, without evident necessity, or any benefit, at the good pleasure alone of
some pious faithful, should we imperil so many souls? I conclude--

"1. It is at least doubtful whether the Church can declare the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception to be certain and obligatory. If its power is doubtful, it
ought to be silent, since there is no necessity of speaking at this time. Your
Holiness is not unaware, that many of the theologians who have written about the
definability of this question, even such as have grave weight with the Holy See,
went further than we; they do not say that the authority of the Church in
defining such questions is doubtful, they deny it altogether. But we, most
Blessed Father, believe the matter to be doubtful, and that in matters of doubt
there ought to be no action. 2. Since the Immaculate Conception cannot be
demonstrated to the unbelieving or to heretics, either by Holy Scripture or by
tradition; since, moreover, both reason and

science raise difficulties, either in themselves insoluble or at least
inextricable, against this opinion, if the Church were by a solemn decree to
declare it obligatory, the Catholic controversy would in this point become weak
and powerless. But thereby the authority of the Church becomes cheaper, the
gravity of her decrees becomes questioned, and the truth of her doctrinal
decisions is denied with increased temerity. Again then, most Blessed Father,
moved by this most grave argument, we will say, the Church ought to abstain from
any decree whereby the opinion as to the Immaculate Conception would become
obligatory. 3. Although by such a decree the Church should neither weaken her
own sacred and infallible authority, nor the deposit of revealed doctrines which
have been already defined, in sight of the unbelieving and of heretics, she
ought to abstain from passing it, on account of the inutility of the decree
itself. For as we have tried to show, the decree in question would be useless,
if not hurtful,--useless to the faithful, useless to the Church, useless in
respect to the glory of the Blessed Virgin. This threefold inutility, even apart
from the perils to souls, abundantly suffices to make the course, which some'
expect the Supreme Pontiff to attempt, to appear illegitimate."-- ii. 26. 1.
Louis, Archbishop of Rouen.--"I consider that this belief is not clearly
contained in the deposit of the Holy Scriptures. I consider that tradition in
this respect is wanting in precision and unanimity. Had the tradition been
clear, could S. Anselm, S. Bonaventura, S. Bernard, S. Thomas, Bellarmine, and
so many others, have been ignorant of it? I consider that the belief of the
Immaculate Conception does not reach, in a way at all explicit or imposing,
above the eleventh century; and that if new beliefs or devotions, favourable to
piety and nowise contrary to order, may be wisely tolerated and even encouraged,
it is still advisable to leave them as free beliefs and simple devotions. I
consider that a dogmatic definition, under present circumstances, would be both
superfluous and perilous. Superfluous, because no one now disputes the Blessed
Virgin the privilege of her most pure Conception, and it is not the custom of
the Church to erect into an article of faith what is disputed by no one.
Perilous, because, considering the state of minds at this moment, it is to be
feared that such a definition will only be a signal for the most lively
discussions, the most wounding imputations. What, for instance, will the English
Theologians, so well versed in the study of Ecclesiastical Antiquity, do or say,
when they shall see the Holy See define, as a point of faith, a matter which so
many ages have scarcely had a glimpse of (entrevue), which so many holy persons
and great doctors have either denied or been ignorant of? Will they not think
that the Church, at this day, holds cheap that principle of S. Vincent of
Lerins, so certain and venerable, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus? And
will not the Catholic doctrine itself suffer much, as a whole, if, as has been
recently the case, certain imprudent champions of the most Holy Virgin, in order
the better to support the privilege of her Immaculate Conception, maintain
publicly, that many of our sacred doctrines do not rest on any more solid
foundation, on any more certain tradition? Instead of the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception being fortified, will not other much more important
doctrines be shaken? And, most Holy Father, I fear much that in this case the
wish to make good better will injure the good. I fear for the peace of the
Church, which, on occasion of this new dogma, may witness destructive passions
roused against her and within her own bosom. I fear for the honour of the Popes,
who will be represented as having been, for 300 years, occupied in stifling free
discussion on the subject; forbidding on the one side, under grave penalties,
any sort of attack upon the privilege of the Immaculate Conception, and, on the
other, favouring, by all possible means, the expansion of this pious belief. I
fear even for yourself.--Will it not be said that Pius IX. exposed the bark of
Peter to frightful tempests, for a matter in which the faith is not concerned,
and which is incapable of any application to human conduct? On all these
grounds, I opine that there is no room for erecting into a dogma of faith the
pious belief in the Immaculate Conception of the Holy Virgin. Far from desiring
such a decree, I should regard it as a dangerous thing, as a two-edged sword,
capable of wounding the hand which should use it. I should rejoice certainly, in
the interest of the mother of God, but I should be disquieted, in the interest
of the Church and her glorious head; and I would not purchase so dear the
consolations of piety."--i. 357-9. 2. The Bishop of Coutançes.--"Having been
taught that pious opinion from boyhood, we, for ourselves and as the
interpreters of the whole Clergy, all profess that Mary was conceived without
stain. Yet we are persuaded, that there is no necessity or advantage in deciding
or teaching, as an Article of faith,

that Mary was conceived without stain of original sin; nay, we all unanimously
think it inopportune and full of peril. For whence should that necessity or
advantage be derived? No question is raised about it; no adversary of the
Immaculate Conception, not the very least, appears; Catechists teach it to boys,
Divinity Professors to seminarists, Preachers of the Divine word to the
faithful. Everywhere piously preached, it is everywhere piously received.

"Moreover, neither the Church nor the Holy See ever, as far as we know, erected
any opinion piously believed into the dignity of a dogma, unless some
controversy of greater moment were raised about it.

"We think then, positively, that there is absolutely no fitting occasion for it;
but there appears to us grave peril, if the matter be touched in the very least.

"Every one knows with what efforts Rationalists and Protestants are assailing
the bark of Peter, the authority of the Roman Pontiff, nay, the Church herself.
Every one knows how many blasphemies the enemies of the Christian name pour out
to weaken the Divine Monarchy. Every one knows with what calumnies those same
inexorable enemies impugn daily the articles of faith.

"If what was hitherto a mere opinion is to-morrow, at the good pleasure of
certain Bishops, to be believed de Fide, under pain of damnation; if, what the
S. Council of Trent itself (as Pallavicini attests) would not decree, although
then controverted and strongly impugned; if, what Pope Pius V., of holy memory,
Gregory XV., and Alexander VII. declared to be, not a dogma, but a mere pious
opinion, what might be contradicted without note of heresy, should be delivered
as a doctrine by decree of the present supreme Pontiff, would not the aforesaid
Rationalists and all uncatholics take occasion for assailing anew and more
fiercely all our doctrines with their impious speeches? Nay, doubtless, a handle
would be given them causelessly for so doing.

"But what is to be more feared, than to raise up these waves of passions and
opinions, especially at this time, when the whole world is shaken with unwonted
commotions, in which Peter (alas!) is ejected from his See, &c.? In these storms
of tribulations, in this whirlpool of great crimes, in these perils and straits
of all sorts, all faithful Christians turn their eyes to Mary, think of Mary,
and call on her, piously and most inwardly believing that she was conceived
without stain.

"Moved by these reasons of graver moment, we judge that a dogmatic decree as to
the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, which could with the
greatest difficulty be derived from Holy Scripture or tradition, should, at
least for a time, be abstained from."--i. 362, 363.

4. The Bishop of Evreux.--"In obedience to the commands of your Holiness, I have
convened the most able Theologians of my diocese; I joined them to my Episcopal
Council, and, after having interrogated and heard them, after having long
studied and meditated in presence of our Lord Jesus Christ in the most Holy
Sacrament of the Altar, after having humbly entreated the Holy Spirit to have
pity upon rny misery and profound ignorance, this is my answer to the questions
put by your Blessedness in your admirable letter.

"1. I do not think it well-timed to agitate at this moment the question of the
Immaculate Conception; (1) because it is attacked by no Catholic, and has never
been more generally admitted than in our century; (2) because many Protestants,
reconciled by our most loved and holy Pope Pius IX. with the Papacy, are in the
way to return, and that nothing would be more calculated to alienate them, than
the obligation which would be laid upon them to cease to regard the belief in
the Immaculate Conception as a matter of opinion.

"2. I do not believe that the passages of Holy Scripture are precise enough, nor
the language of tradition explicit enough, or certain enough in all Centuries,
that this opinion (certain as it seems to me) should be advanced to be a dogma
of faith.

"The rules laid down by all Theologians seem to contradict this. "Our great
strength, when we discuss with heretics, is this maxim of S. Vincent of
Lerins,--Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus traditum est, &c. "On these
grounds, which it would seem to me unsuitable and perfectly useless to develop
to your Holiness, I would conjure you to abide by the examples of your Venerable
Predecessors in the Apostolic

See, and to leave amid oppositions this holy opinion, which Bossuet called the
most certain of truths."--i. 100, 101.

5. The Bishop of Chartres.--"Never in my flock, and, I assert confidently, in
all the Dioceses of France, did faithful Catholics burn with greater devotion
and love towards Mary, never did they place fuller confidence in her; never in
tribulations did they with more fervent impetus seek protection at her feet.
Nothing can be added to the most lively significations of cultus towards Mary,
which burst forth on all sides from the hearts of the faithful. It follows, that
the pronouncing of this dogma of faith' will add nothing to this full, complete,
and (so to speak) exuberant devotion. Nay, so far from kindling, it would
burden, hinder, disturb it. For what confusion! what tumults! what protestations
of rebellious men! The Jansenists and other Catholics of weak or less proved
faith would cry out against the insertion of this dogma among articles of faith;
they would rise up most boldly against it, try to draw Augustine, Bernard,
Thomas, on their side; excite discord, assail with doubts and cavils the cultus
of the Deipara which already includes the Immaculate Conception, and, so far
from procuring any relaxation or comfort, would further accumulate the most
vehement affliction of the Church.

"2. The Protestants, who incline to the Catholic faith, which the numerous
conversions of very learned men, especially in England, attest most gloriously,
would be deterred by the newness of this dogma from completing what they have
begun. They would think, that all the articles of faith were declared in the
Council of Trent, and that that most learned synod completed the Catholic
doctrine. The impious Rationalists, Socialists, who are busy in entrapping the
ignorance of the people by false interpretations of Evangelic doctrine, would
try to accommodate this novelty to their ends, exclaiming that the Apostolic
See, by sanctioning things hitherto unknown and unheard of, plainly favours
their detestable comments. So then this plague, which no tears can expiate,
would exult with fouler and more abominable licence.

"3. The faithful spontaneously, without constraint, without terror of Apostolic
fulmination, believe, admire, venerate most profoundly the Immaculate
Conception: devotion towards Mary seems thence the sweeter; for voluntariness is
the condiment of love, the sweet aspiration of piety, the seal of filial
affection, &c.

"To condense my meaning in few words, I declare it as represented with wonderful
clearness and absolute precision in the following clause of the most learned
Pétau: To bring to a close the discussion of this question, I think that the
most holy Virgin Mother of God was free, not only from all actual sin of her
own, but from original also. But I am so far persuaded of this, that I would not
have it counted of faith, nor would I believe that any one was to be condemned,
or speak hardly of one who thinks otherwise; nor am I prepared to maintain it in
any other way than that now prescribed by the Roman Pontiffs and the Council of
Trent, i. e. by the Catholic Church' (de Incarn. xiv. 2. 10). This tempered zeal
circumstances seem to me especially to recommend, as also Apostolic moderation,
and the very necessary counsel not to add sharpest strifes about matters of
faith to horrible civil tumults. I think that nothing ought to be added to the
causes of division and heat of mind, whose fury and rage is unexampled from the
beginning of the world. For the glory of the Virgin and the good of the Church,
what, as Pétau says, has been already decreed by supreme Pontiffs and the
Council of Trent suffices. If, in a short time, as I most firmly believe, the
most splendid benefits of the Virgin, who is terrible as an armed host, require
other attestations of gratitude, your Holiness has other honours at hand to
discharge this debt, and declare throughout the world your piety and grateful
remembrance."--i. 175, 176. 1. The Bishop of Anneçy.--"We readily own to your
Blessedness, that to us it would appear better, if a solemn sentence, whereby
the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin should be proposed to be believed as an
article of faith, and true dogma, should be abstained from. For, in our opinion,
such a judgment could not easily escape the note of novelty, as being contrary
to the practice of the Church, which has not been wont to define Christian
truths, resting on Scripture or transmitted by tradition, as to be held as
dogmas under pain of anathema, unless they were impugned by some."--i. 445, 446.
2. The Bishop of Meaux.--"We confess that we do not think that, in the
circumstances of these times, it is opportune that a matter, about which Doctors
and Theologians, most distinguished for piety and knowledge, have so long
controverted among themselves, should be defined by a solemn judgment. We

confess too, that we fear lest the cultus of the most Holy Virgin, conceived
without stain, should suffer detriment: and the piety which now of its own
accord pays her distinguished honours should be chilled, when, by force of a
dogmatic definition, they shall seem less voluntary. It is to be feared too,
lest the authority of Mother Church should perchance be diminished by the
clamours of the pseudo-reformed and unbelieving philosophers of these times, on
all sides, that the faith is changed in the lapse of time, and that new
doctrines are daily coined by the Church."--ii. 363. 1. The Bishop of
Carcassonne.--"In these most miserable and sorrowful times, very many, who have
been baptized in the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, desert this faith, or,
retaining its elements, have entangled it with so many false doctrines, that
their mind, ever struggling against the truth, is most ready for every sort of
scandal. Wherefore we fear lest, things being so, a solemn dogmatic definition
of the Immaculate Conception of the Most Holy Virgin Mary would give occasion to
the ungodly and to heretics to sadden the Church by disputations, and to assail
with contumelies and blasphemies the Mother of the Saviour, whom we venerate
singularly with the inmost affections of the heart. Whence we think that there
is ground to doubt, whether the promulgation of such a decree, which in other
times would fill our heart with joy, would be opportune at present."--iii. 333.
2. The Bishop of Amiens.--"But although, by that definition, the most pious
opinion as to the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God is set forth, as
founded in the doctrine of the Universal Church, nor can it be called in
question without condemnable temerity, or contradicted without note of error,
there lack not among us such as think that, if that doctrine should be
assimilated to an express article of faith, there would be ground to fear, lest
controversies should arise in the schools as to the conditions required for an
express article of faith. Thence, they say, perhaps would be scandal to the
weak, discussions and strifes of words among the learned; and to the heretics
and unbelieving occasion would be given of speaking things wrong and injurious
to religion."--i. 135.

10, 11. The Archbishop of Rheims and the Bishop of Soisson said the same, more
concisely, but with the same leading words, as the wish of themselves, the
Canons, Directors of Seminaries, Professors of Divinity, Parish Priests, and
pious Laity.--i. 121, 122. iii. 290. 1. The Bishop of Beauvais.--"In order to
proceed with due prudence in a matter of such moment, we did not neglect to
consult the Canons of our Church, and some presbyters conspicuous for piety and
learning. Some of them (although all believe from the heart that Mary was free
from original taint, yet having maturely weighed the question) had some doubts
whether the testimonies of Holy Scripture and tradition were so clear and
unshaken that it might be settled by a dogmatic decree. They thought also that
perhaps it was not necessary, since the most pious opinion as to the Immaculate
Conception is, at this time, not impugned, and is not connected with the defence
of other dogma or rules of life; nay, that it was not opportune, since there was
ground to fear that heretics and unbelievers would say, that tradition was
corrupted by the Church, or that new dogmas gradually crept in or were invented
at will, and that thus, on account of a new decree on controverted doctrine, the
weak might be turned away from embracing the ancient faith. We should be glad
that the words of the decree should be so softened, that they who do not assent
to this privilege [of the Blessed Virgin] should remain free from the note of
heresy, in that it should be declared that the Church does not err when it
teaches, that the Blessed Virgin, the Mother of God, was wholly free from all
taint of original fault. By a decree thus tempered, the end intended would be
gained, the Catholic truth would be asserted, the piety of the faithful
fostered, and heretics or unbelievers would have no place of crying out against
the Church."--i. 320, 321. 2. The Bishop of Blois.--"In publishing such a
definition, there is need of very great caution and indulgence for the salvation
of many, since, in our times, the sense of Catholic truths is much diminished.
Every one sees this, who considers things attentively and judges from
experience, that there are men now, some indifferent to religion, others wholly
intent on politics, many fevered with the licence of thinking what they will,
and so that the truths of Christian faith and piety are obscured among the
people; and, accordingly, that the dogmatic definition of our most pious
opinion, whereas at first it would be entertained with joy and gratulation by
the pious and learned, would be received by most other Catholics with a dull
carelessness, not to say, worse. For perchance (and this is not improbable on
account of the age, the

feverishness of men and the pride of the insolent) an opinion which seems to
them new will cause hindrance or delay to some sinners in returning to the
Father's house. Nay, manifoldly as the pastors may instruct the people, it is to
be feared that many pious faithful will, with difficulty or not at all,
understand how the Church, after eighteen centuries, should now employ itself in
proposing to all Christians, as an article of faith necessary to salvation, that
which before it had left to the free and pious choice of each; especially since,
in these our times, there is scarcely any one who disputes the truth of the
Immaculate Conception, but every learned and religious Catholic accounts it a
duty and merit to believe and profess it."--i. 211, 212.

On the other hand, the Bishop of Blois set the need of consolation which the
Church had from the Blessed Virgin, which rendered the definition timely; and
so, in due regard to the charity needed by so many, weak and ignorant, blind and
unbelieving, asked the Pope not to define it so directly and expressly, that
they who should not believe it, should thereby be separated from the Church, and
incur the note and penalty of heresy. 1. The Archbishop of Bourges gave the
opinion of ecclesiastics very distinguished for theological science, whom he had
con suited, and who had given him their mature judgment. "It seems that, in
these troubled and stormy times, the publication of this definition would
perhaps give a handle to the enemies of God's Holy Church to raise new
calumnies, and vomit forth blasphemies, whence no light scandal might arise,
especially to the unlearned and weak; they, too, who are frequently engaged in
controversy with un-Catholics, fear lest the very greatest hindrance should thus
be put to the return of heretics on the point of coming back to the bosom of
Mother Church, since there is nothing which they more abhor, nothing which turns
them more from the Catholic faith. Moreover, some, who piously believe and
profess the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin, think that this
question, although clear, is not such that that well-known rule of Vincent of
Lerins, quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus traditum est, could be applied
to it. Whence they think that, according to the ancient custom of the Church, it
ought not to be defined. But I, most Holy Father, although I exceedingly desire
whatever would be to the honour of the glorious Virgin, cannot but acknowledge,
on the aforesaid grounds, that a definition thereon from the Apostolic See
perhaps would be inopportune, and would not make for peace and unity, especially
amid these present storms, fearing that greater evils would come from it than
good."--i. 497, 498. 2. The Bishop of Versailles.--"Although I was myself among
those who, out of a feeling of filial piety toward Mary, humbly prayed his
Holiness, Gregory XVI. of glorious memory, to declare the Conception of Mary
Immaculate by a solemn decree, I think it due to my conscience to set before
your Holiness a thought of fear, perhaps exaggerated, which takes hold of me. 3.
"In the bosom of France there still live unbelieving children whom heresy keeps
far from their home. In their deplorable blindness, they still reproach us with
the worship we render to Mary. It is not without difficulty that we can bring
them to believe about the Mother of God, what is already of faith. Shall we not
find more obstacles to their return, when, to reconcile them to the Church, we
shall have to require of them explicit faith in the Immaculate Conception?
Perhaps, to anticipate this difficulty, there would be ground for not giving the
character of a Catholic dogma to the truth of the Immaculate Conception,
especially seeing that, even if the Immaculate Conception should not be a
necessary object of faith, the glorious Virgin would not be less honoured by all
the pious faithful under this title."--ii. 101, 103. 4. The Bishop of
Angers.--"A doubt arises, first, because minds are at rest, as I said, not only
in my Diocese, but in every part of France, yea, in the whole Catholic Church.
Would it not be to be wished, that this peace and rest of souls should be
maintained? "Would there not be peril of disturbing minds by passing a decree on
that subject, the minds not of the pious, but of those, no few, who contradict
the truth, and subject all things to the examination of reason? I confess that
there is, as far as I know, no such peril for my diocese; but, in our times,
there are many who love liberty, impatient of a yoke, who superextol reason and
its discoveries. In France, there is great liberty, not to say great licence of
thinking, writing, printing, which writers, and those of no mean sort, use and
abuse, to bring all things, even religious and sacred, into mockery and
contempt; and so they impel others and are impelled themselves to evil and
blasphemy. In this condition, then, of things and minds, it is to be feared that
a dogmatic decision may

perhaps cherish evil passions and open a door to dangerous discussions.

"A doubt arises, secondly, not now from the clamours of impious men, but from
the novelty of the definition itself. For among those who are less audacious,
among those too who seem fairly good, not a few may be found, who will wonder
that this definition has been so long delayed, the thing being so evident and
clear; and who will venture to say, although undeservedly, the new dogmas are
fabricated and devised by the Church. Many things have indeed been defined, in
the lapse of time, which before were not counted among articles of faith. They
were often impugned, whence it became necessary in a manner to define them. Here
the case is different. The fact of the Immaculate Conception is admitted, and
securely believed, in the whole Catholic Church; nor does it appear, that piety
toward the Blessed Virgin would be much increased by the supervention of such a
decree."--i. 257. 1. Savoy. The Archbishop of Chambéry.--"The Clergy and people
of this diocese burn with the most sincere devotion towards the Blessed Virgin;
they profess her Immaculate Conception as a pious and most probable opinion, but
not as a doctrine to be held of necessity and de fide,' i. e. in much the same
way in which they profess the Assumption of the Virgin to heaven, and her
preservation from all, even venial sin; and this, because the tradition of
former ages of the Church does not seem clear enough to constitute an article of
faith, and a true dogma to be believed by all under pain of mortal sin. It would
seem then to us better to imitate the prudent line of the Council of Trent, by
abstaining from any definition, as did that same Council (sess. 24, can. 7 and
8), by asserting, e. g. that the cultus which the Catholic Church uses towards
the Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mother is pious and holy.'"--i. 411, 412.
2. Switzerland. The Bishop of S. Gall.--"From all this, I and my Councillors are
persuaded that the veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary, whom, with the Holy
Father and Holy Church, we firmly believe to have been conceived without stain
and exempt from original sin, cannot be increased by any dogmatic decision or
definition that she was so conceived, and that such a dogmatic decision is for
this time superfluous.

"But what, in our disturbed times, everywhere seduced by a false worldly light,
seems to advise, not to enact, at present, the dogma of the Immaculate
Conception, but rather to defer it to a new era, as is hoped, more friendly to
the Catholic religion and obedient to the Vicar of Christ and Bishops of the
Holy Church is as follows:--

"Such a superfluous dogmatic decree being delivered and published in Switzerland
and Germany, infected by un-Catholics and innovators, various disputations would
be caused, pamphlets full of hatred and calumnies would be published, the dogma
would be impugned and wickedly deformed in public papers, which find entrance
everywhere; and so the seduction of many would be to be feared, the obstinacy of
un-Catholics would be strengthened, and they be turned further away from the
truth. Public papers and pamphlets written against religion would be published
in far greater numbers than those in defence of the Catholic faith.

"It does not seem advisable to bring forward a matter so delicate as that of the
Conception, or any treatise about it, without necessity. The temptation to
wicked and carnal authors, of casting forth foul things after the manner of the
wretched Voltaire and his followers, would be too great."--iii. 302, 303. 1.
Bavaria. The Archbishop of Munich.--"But whether, in the present circumstances
of the Church, a definition is advisable or no, I scarce venture to decide,
since it may be said, not without some appearance of truth, that such a
definition will provoke fresh discussions in countries where Catholics live
mixed with heretics."--ii. 417. 2. Archbishop of Bamberg.--"By far the greatest
part of the Clergy is persuaded that this is not the time to decide what
remained so long undecided, and which so many of your Predecessors, and those so
great, and the fathers of the Tridentine Council itself, hesitated to decide.
They think that such a decision will be of no benefit to the faithful people, in
that it adheres to the pious opinion of "the Immaculate Conception of the
Blessed Virgin spread far and wide; and to the body of the more erudite and
learned in our Germany the matter does not seem so clear that (whatever the very
learned and illustrious Tramontanes may say, who have very recently written in
behalf of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin) they can think that
this opinion, which has been hitherto cherished as pious, should be enrolled
among

dogmas, about which no one may doubt. They think that account should be had of
the state of the times, most troubled both as to the ecclesiastical and civil
polity; that it does not belong to these times to revive inveterate disputes;
that there is peril, lest new rents should take place in the Church; lastly,
that it is no derogation from the cultus of the Blessed Virgin, if that should
be left longer undecided, which has so long seemed matter of most difficult
discussion. In this opinion of far the greatest part of my Clergy, which I have
learned from the report of the Deans, the Chapter of the Cathedral Church of
Bamberg joined unanimously, to which I cannot but unite myself. Be the dogmatic
definition of this question left, most Holy Father, to other times. Be the
decision of this matter reserved to a General Council to be celebrated
hereafter. We have that sacred deposit of dogmas decided by the most holy
fathers in General Councils, to defend which against the very frequent attacks
of the heresies of this time, and to establish it in the minds of our faithful
people, will suffice for our most arduous office."--ii. 59.

21. Archbishop of Gorizia and Gradisca.--"The peasantry, and other of the lower
orders of the Diocese committed to my care, worships [colit] most devotedly the
most Blessed Virgin Mary, and frequents in great numbers the shrines in my
diocese dedicated to her; but it does not desire that the pious belief of her
Immaculate Conception should be turned into a Catholic dogma, an Article of
faith; nor is the least wish for any such decision manifested among the people,
as far as has become known to myself and other neighbouring Bishops. As for
persons of the upper, and, as they are called, more cultivated classes, they do
indeed still retain the devotion and cultus of the Virgin Mary, although not in
that fervour and number observable in the peasantry and poorer artisans; but so
far from desiring that the most pious opinion of the Immaculate Conception of
the Virgin Mary should be raised to the rank of Catholic dogmas or articles of
the Holy Faith, they (at least the larger part of the aforesaid classes) are of
directly the opposite mind.

"The fratres minores of S. Francis, called Observants in the Convent of
Castagnavira, are most devoted to the cultus of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and
have an office of their own of the Immaculate Conception, but they have never
manifested the least wish that the most pious belief of the Immaculate
Conception should be changed into an article of faith, nay, rather, though most
observant of the discipline of their rule, they fear the effect of such a
decision in regard to the heterodox and to lukewarm Catholics, the number of
whom is at this time immense.

"I must say the same of the secular Clergy, which, with few exceptions, is pious
and studious of sacerdotal discipline. [Then follows, If the present state--full
of peril,' given above, pp. 177, 178.] "For in past years there were heard, and
still are heard, the assertion of Protestants and indifferent Catholics, that
Rome puts an unbearable yoke on the faithful, by coining new dogmas, and forming
articles of faith from the rhetorical expressions of one or two fathers, and
enjoining that that should be held with firm faith as a dogma, which a few
centuries, nay, a few decennia before, might be questioned, and the assertors of
the contrary whereof Roman Pontiffs had forbidden to condemn.' What then would
happen, if the most pious faith (yea, the pious opinion,' as it still stands in
Catechisms) of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, should be
declared as a dogma of sacred faith? Will it be an increase of faith? Will it be
a happier condition of the Catholic Church? Is a restoration of affairs at Rome
to be hoped therefrom? I, as far as it is given me by God to see, fear
exceedingly the contrary. It is a matter, I must repeat, full of peril. When
some years ago, under Gregory XVI., the same question was proposed to the
Bishops, there came to me letters of Catholic Bishops from countries very remote
from this, the writers whereof exclaimed in amazement, Does Rome mean to form
new articles of faith?" Should we have a more beneficial result now? I doubt
most exceedingly." [Then follows, Under these circumstances--the Son of God.'
Above, p. 178.] He sums up, "This is what, after instituting a mature
examination in the .sight of God in this most grave matter, I thought I ought to
explain to your Holiness, and I do explain it with all befitting submission of
mind and reverence," &c.--i. 178, 179.

22. The Archbishop of Salsburg.--"This pious faith being now nowhere
controverted, nay, every one being free, undisturbed by any, to indulge this
cultus in his own way, all gladly acquiesce in the most wise constitution of the
Council of Trent published thereon, so that I do not know that any one wishes
for a new decree of the Apostolic See. Moreover, history attests, that the
Church then chiefly intervened by a

peremptory decision, when the wrongful zeal of men attempted either to question,
or to corrupt by sinister interpretation the faith given by God, neither of
which is done (it is known) in the present case. Added to this, the opinion is
fixed in the minds of very many, that there exists not such authority of
Apostolic tradition, that the Immaculate Conception of the most Blessed Virgin
can be established by a decree divinely certain. Wherefore I think that it is
much to be feared, that, whereas formerly most grave and lasting controversies
were lulled by Apostolic decrees, issued on matters of faith, the declaration of
the Holy See would this time rather furnish fresh matter for doubts and discords
about that question which are now quite hushed or unknown, and the enemies of
the Church, ever ready to censure, would take occasion thence of impiously
calumniating her, as though she delivered new dogmas without the suffrage of
Divine tradition. Being then commanded by your Holiness to exp lain candidly my
mind in this matter, considering the adjuncts of the times, I cannot bring
myself to think that the counsel to declare that pious belief as a Catholic
dogma is opportune, or that it will really advance that cultus. In that ferment
of minds which now prevails, very inimical to religion and piety, I fear that
such a public and solemn declaration is a matter full of peril, such as the
other many and great difficulties with which the Church now struggles, seem to
dissuade from voluntarily provoking."--i. 326, 327.

23. The Bishop of Trieste.--"The people of the united Diocese of Trieste and
Capo d'Istria are animated with such devotion to the Immaculate Conception of
the Blessed Virgin Mary, that any doubt which might be newly raised as to this
doctrine would excite the greatest disturbance of mind, and give useless, nay,
very perilous occasion to theological questions among the laity themselves. For
this cause I omitted express mention of the wish that it should at last be
decided by a solemn judgment that the Blessed Virgin was conceived without
original taint, in order to maintain the laudable and firm opinion of the
faithful people herein; and also I did not venture to express openly the
consideration of the topic, to guard against discussions among some of the
clergy themselves, who keep silence as to the opposite opinion, not out of any
conviction of their own, but rather out of obedience.

"For myself, I own plainly, that it is extremely to be desired that the
intention of the most Holy Council of Trent (Sess. v.), according to which the
Blessed and Immaculate Virgin Mary was not comprised in the decree as to
original sin, should be explained more clearly, and the Catholic doctrine of her
Immaculate Conception should be defined in unambiguous terms; yet, having
weighed the aforesaid considerations, I should wish to follow the counsel of
many brethren (confratrum,' other Bishops), who in the present circumstances and
at this time hold that it is better that any direct definition should be
deferred, and wish only for a tacit definition, decreeing the sanctity of the
ecclesiastical rite now used in the cultus of the Conception of the Blessed
Virgin." --i. 435, 436.

24, 25. Moravia. The Archbishop of Olmütz, and the Bishop of
Brünn.--"Nevertheless, the most humbly subscribed cannot adopt the opinion that
now at present this pious assertion should be placed by a Pontifical decree
among dogmas of faith. The gravest reason, whereby, after mature deliberation
and fervid imploring of light from above, they feel themselves moved so to
judge, is taken from the most difficult circumstances of the countries over
whose Churches they are set. A most cunning heresy spreads with impunity in
these parts, which has been wont most greedily to seize every handle for
criminating the Catholic Church. Among divers protests, whereby it attempts to
entice the faithful to its side, is this also, that they blatter (certainly,
without any solid foundation), that the Catholic Church forms new dogmas at
will. But if, by a solemn judgment of the Holy Apostolic See, the Immaculate
Conception of the Blessed Virgin should be defined at this time as a dogmatic
doctrine of the Catholic Church, doubtless that most false incrimination would
shake many, less firm in the Catholic faith, with great peril of souls. This
peril ought the more to be considered, because hitherto, through an erroneous
statement of the subject, the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary
has been considered by many faithful of the Catholic Church as only a pious
opinion; accordingly, it could not be without disturbance of minds, that what
(although persuaded of its truth, and not doubting) they seemed until now only
to opine, they should be obliged to revere as a Catholic dogma.

"Our counsel, therefore, tends to this, that, until circumstances be changed,
things should remain as they are. The faithful do not doubt the Immaculate
Conception to the Virgin Deipara; the cultus of that

mystery increases daily; souls then are not imperilled on the head of truth's
not being acknowledged; but contrariwise no slight perils are avoided, which
come reasonably to be feared from the dogmatic pronouncement of the truth by the
Apostolic See.

"This state of things was the ground why the most humbly subscribed hesitated to
execute the exhortation of your Holiness, prudently accounting that the
appointment of public prayers in their dioceses for the obtaining of light from
above for counsel to be taken in this matter, could not be without detriment to
religion and the Holy Apostolic See."--iii. 232, 283.

25. b) The four Bishops of Bohemia.--They thank the Pope, for "the most precious
letter, wherein in sweetest words the feelings of our mind towards the most
Blessed Virgin are expressed; "and they state that they had assiduously
endeavoured to promote among the people "the Catholic cultus of her."

"Full of the same faith as your Holiness, that the most Blessed Virgin was
conceived without any stain of original fault? we gave public testimony of this
faith in the prayer addressed to the Predecessor of your Holiness, of most pious
memory, Gregory XVI., that we might be allowed publicly to enunciate and add the
word Immaculate in the Preface and Litanies of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

"So then, unanimous and joyous, we report to your Holiness that this faith, that
the Blessed Virgin Mary was conceived without stain of original fault, is held
both by the clergy and the faithful people as a doctrine of our Holy Church from
most ancient tradition.

"Nevertheless, since the question is, that this faith be decreed by the solemn
judgment of the Apostolic See, we, following the most venerable example of your
Holiness, thought that we ought to consult some persons proved by piety and
theological discipline. Having heard their judgment, and weighed it maturely in
the Lord, we thought that we ought to signify to your Holiness that this faith,
as we have set forth, is vivid, and is taught of old in our Christian people and
clergy, but that because in these last times there has been no controversy about
this belief, and no heretical doctrines, opposed to it, seem to urge such a
decision; the modern adjuncts of time, place, and men do not recommend that this
most ancient belief should be decreed as a doctrine by the solemn judgment of
our holy Roman Catholic Church. For the multitude of unbelievers, heretics, and
adversaries of our holy Church in our neighbourhood, and living among the
faithful in our regions, would abuse such a decision most foully to their own
perverse ends by their diabolic calumnies; so that we have good grounds to fear,
lest many of the weak, the number whereof hath very greatly increased through
the machinations of false prophets, be seduced, and make shipwreck of their
faith, and, with their faith, of their everlasting salvation.

"This our judgment, besought from the Lord with assiduous prayers, which we
signify to your Holiness," &c.--ii. 403.

26. Archbishop of Breslau, to the Apostolic Nuncio at Vienna.-- "According to
the opinion of the most zealous and enlightened Catholics such a disturbance
would infallibly arise, if the dogmatic decree [on the Immaculate Conception]
should be passed by the Holy See. The Protestant writers contending, pro aris et
focis, would seize it as a welcome prey, to deafen anew their poor people by
their cries against the papacy and the manufacture of dogmas discovered after
eighteen centuries; unbelievers would join in chorus with the pietists, and
would discharge fresh floods of sarcasms and blasphemies against this holy
mystery; the literary Jewish youth would especially excel therein. So much for
those without. Within, the secular war in the schools of theology, appeased with
so much difficulty, would be kindled anew; that very delicate point of the
infallibility of the Pope would give it an accession of combustible matter; the
opposition of a part of the clergy imbued with Neologism, in the Rhine
provinces, in Baden, and in Bohemia, would also find food therein; and as the
result, instead of edification and a new spring of piety and devotion in the
Catholic people, there would be nothing but troubles, divisions, scandals,
disturbances without and within,--things a thousand times more dangerous now
than they were in past centuries.

"I have re-read before I decided on writing this letter to you, my Lord, the
chapters of Pallavicini (Hist, of the Council of Trent), and of Pétau (Theol.
Dogm. T. vi. L. xiv. c. 2) on this subject; and this study has encouraged me to
do so. History proves that hitherto the Holy See has only given dogmatic decrees
to appease polemic and scandalous strifes, or to repress dangerous errors. In
the present case neither of these grounds is apparent; the ground for acting
would be a pure motive of piety, of devotion,--a motive very

beautiful, very precious in the eyes of God and of every faithful soul,--a
motive, which for certain countries and certain people might also be founded on
the fruits to be looked for, but which for our country (as I have had the honour
to explain to you, my Lord) is counterbalanced by greater considerations, which
discover the greatest dangers to the Church in the pronouncing of such a decree.
I have allayed my Episcopal conscience, my Lord, in communicating to you my
thoughts and apprehensions in this matter. I have spoken to you as the organ of
the sovereign Pontiff. I repeat once more, that, in what I have just set forth,
I find myself of one mind with all the most zealous and enlightened Catholics in
our country. Make what use of this letter you please. Dixi et salvavi animam
meam.'"--ii. 466, 477. 1. The Bishop of Warmia.--"The Clergy of this diocese
entertain a singular devotion to the most glorious Virgin; but as to her
conception, many (and among them the Chapter of Warmia) have given their
judgment, that in these turbulent times, ill-disposed as to ecclesiastical as
well as civil matters, for the guarding against heresies and avoidance of
schisms, it is not expedient to decree any thing new in this matter by Apostolic
authority, but that it is more suitable, that this faith should, until a more
fitting time, be left under the terms which the holy Tridentine Synod laid down
(Sess. v.), on original sin. Yet after deducting these, there is still a great
number of those who have openly professed the Immaculate Conception, with the
most ardent desire that this faith should be decreed and confirmed by Apostolic
authority." "Among the people of the diocese of Warmia, which is, with inmost
devotion, addicted to the worship of the most Holy Virgin,--the faith of the
Immaculate Conception obtains universally, although there are those, who, being
less instructed in the faith, under the term Immaculate Conception,' apprehend
and believe not the origin of the Virgin herself, but the Conception of God-Man
in the Virgin's womb, by the operation of the Holy Ghost. The faith in the
Immaculate Conception is cherished and fed among the people of Warmia by the
diligence of the parish priests, especially in sermons; and, as I am persuaded,
none of the clergy, although he hold an opposite opinion, would venture to teach
or say any thing to injure the pious faith in the Immaculate Conception among
the people, or whereby that faith might be imperilled or made matter of doubt.
But there are some among the people of Warmia, who fear lest, if anything new be
decreed by Apostolic authority about the Conception of the Blessed Virgin, the
uninstructed people, who cannot distinguish between dogma and that which is only
to be piously believed, may bring into some peril the faith as to the Immaculate
Conception too, which now exists universally." 2. The Bishop of Munster.--"As to
the longing that this opinion should now be defined by the Apostolic See as a
doctrine of the Catholic Church, no wishes of this sort have reached me
hitherto, except of some men whose opinion was especially sought. Nay, there are
not wanting those who think that a dogmatic decision will not be without peril
for these times and for Germany. Nor would I deny that, according to the
character of the times, and in the provinces of our German fatherland, in which
so many adherents of un-Catholic dogmas lire mostly mixed with Catholics,
controversies might arise on occasion of this definition, injurious to
Catholicism, and perilous to those Catholics who are less deeply acquainted with
Catholic doctrine, and so are more easily moved by the objections of unbelievers
and heretics."--vii. pp. cxxxviii., ix. 3. The Bishop of Paderborn.--"But even
though I am persuaded that the dogmatic definition of the Immaculate Conception
rests on a firm foundation of truth, yet about the other question, whether this
our time is opportune and fitted for the emanation of the aforesaid dogmatic
declaration, I can scarce remove all doubt. At least, considering the
circumstances of my diocese, which is manifoldly extended amid regions
altogether Protestant, and weighing especially the character of this restless
time, very much inclined to dissensions and disputations, religious as well as
political, it is to be feared that the adversaries of the Church would from that
dogmatic definition get a handle for disputations and revilings against our holy
religion; and lest to such of the faithful as are inadequately instructed in
Divine things, or who cleave but lukewarmly to the Holy Mother Church, scandals
should arise thence and perils of discord and alienation from the orthodox
faith. When I weigh these things, and at the same time revolve that the greater
part of the faithful people are already heartily devoted to the pious opinion of
the Immaculate Conception of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary, and so, that there is
no urgent necessity for the dogmatic declaration of the same; after having long
and much weighed in my mind the bearings of this most grave matter, it seems

to me most expedient, to the benefit of the Church, and to the praise of our
most loving Mother Mary, if that dogmatic definition should be not abandoned
altogether,' but deferred for a time, until more quiet and peaceful times be
restored to our Germany, and until the Church shall enjoy a firmer and
consolidated fruition of the liberties granted to her in these last times by
kings and princes.

"This my sentence, whereto all the members of the Chapter of this Cathedral
Church and other learned and good priests agree, I, explaining to your Holiness
with the greatest devotion and all fitting confidence, leave the whole matter to
your prudence and wisdom; and whatever you, under the inspiration of God, shall
think it conducive to His honour to determine or define thereon, that I will,
with readiest heart and due submission, receive as the utterance of God, will
ratify and profess by word and deed throughout the diocese intrusted to my
pastoral care."-- iii. 181. 1. The Bishop of Trèves.--"I confess that, for some
little time, I, with some other Ecclesiastics, hesitated whether, having regard
to un-Catholics, with whom, in most dioceses in Germany, we live intermixed, an
opportune time has arrived for such a solemn declaration, in that I fear
therefrom new cavils and incriminations against holy Mother Church, and against
the holy Apostolic See. 2. "But, having weighed the matter more maturely, I have
laid aside all doubt, and firmly trust in the Lord, that the Conception of the
Immaculate Virgin, defined as a doctrine of the Catholic Church, will contribute
most exceedingly to confound the adversaries of the faith, inasmuch as it is she
who alone slew all heresies in the whole world."--vii. p. clvii. 3. The Bishop
of Hildesheim.--"1. In celebrating this [feast of the Immaculate Conception] the
most Blessed Virgin is considered by the people all beautiful and without stain,
so that they could not think that it would come into controversy; hence they do
not desire any decision.

"2. There is scarce any hope that the devotion of the people should be increased
by such decision; rather, it is to be feared lest they should marvel at such a
decree in a matter certain to them, and lest the younger should by its
publication be incited ad cogitationes minus puras.' But as to the rest, who are
alien from the Catholic Church, there is danger lest it should be made a handle
of assailing the cultus of the Blessed Virgin with new calumnies.

"Wherefore the greater part thought that a dogmatic decree was neither
necessary, at least in these regions, nor desirable.

"As to the Clergy, their opinions differed. The greater part professes the
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin; others consider it only a
pious opinion,' supporting themselves by the decree of the Council of Trent.
(Sess. v., of Original Sin.)

"For myself, I profess that the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin seems to me
inseparable from the dignity of the Mother of God, and, on the ground of the
consent of the Church at this time, certain. But whether or no its dogmatic
definition is desirable, at least for our regions, and is for the good of the
Church and the greater honour of the Blessed Virgin, this, for the reasons set
forth above by the Clergy, and which are not to be altogether thought lightly
of, I would not dare to affirm."--iii. 346.

32. Bishop of Fulda.--"Yet neither among the Clergy are there wanting men, who,
distinguished for knowledge, full of piety towards Mother Church, have indeed
the same faith as others as to the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, and
who, should any thing be enacted by the Apostolic See thereon would embrace it
most humbly; yet do not advise or wish that it should be done in our turbulent
times, wherein impiety rages with such impunity, and neither Church nor State
enjoy peace. They regard the greater part of the faithful people, who, even
without any declaration of the Church that the most Blessed Virgin enjoys this
prerogative, venerate the undefiled Mother: they regard the tepid, living
chiefly in cities with un-Catholics, who, not being stable in faith, nor well
grounded in charity towards the most pious Virgin, if a controversy should
perchance arise between them and the adversaries of the Catholic faith, may
easily be worsted: they regard the countless host of enemies, to whom, as they
fear, an opportune occasion and handle would be given by the doctrine decided by
the judgment of the Apostolic See, of calumniating the spouse of our Lord, the
Catholic Church, and of inveighing most bitterly against the undefiled Virgin,
especially since, at this time, all things are disturbed in Germany, all are
confused, and that ancient serpent aims at the heel more vehemently than ever.
Although I do not deny that these anxieties

are not to be held cheap or despised, and would not conceal them from your
Holiness, yet, after having poured forth copious prayers to God the Father of
Light, I cannot subscribe to their opinion, which, approaching the throne of
your Holiness, I candidly confess. For the greater the number of adversaries,
the more insolently they persecute the Lord Christ in His Church, the mo re the
secular arm is shortened, the more impotent have become the kings who protect
her, the more ought the Church, who has to contend with the powers of darkness,
to pray for her aid and help, who bruised the serpent's head, to extol with
praises and venerate with prayers her, who, praying her Son, alone slew all
heresies in the whole world."--

ii. 439.

33. J. A. Paredis, Apostolic Administrator of Limburg.--Alleged against the
decision: "1. The question was too much agitated formerly without any fruit to
souls. 2. Both sides have been defended by persons above all exception, nay,
saints. 3. Those who denied or opposed it were as devoted to the Blessed Virgin
Mary, and venerated her as much as those who defended it. 4. The question is at
this time extinct altogether, at least in this country. 5. The faithful are
either ignorant of, or misunderstand the question.

"But on the other side, 1. According to the mind of the most Holy Lord, the mind
of all Bishops, &c., in this matter has been sought. 2. The faithful were
instructed of this, and exhorted to pour out prayer to this end. 3. The question
then has in some measure revived, and if a definition do not follow, its issue
is unknown. 4. For the affirmative, there are motives founded on theological
reason, and on practice pretty general at this day; therefore on this side I
think the contrary, and judge that a dogmatic definition may be published.

"Meanwhile, our most Holy Lord, Pope Pius IX., will judge in his prudence and
infallibility, and his judgment is ours."--iii. 308. 1. b) The Bishop of
Spire.--Himself desired its promulgation as an article of faith, but added, "The
matter being of so great moment I cannot but observe, that there are some
theologians and ecclesiastics who do not at all think that a doctrine hitherto
left to the disputations of the schools should be defined by an immutable
sentence, whereby free judgment on the matter should be cut off. and
pertinacious spirits might be harassed and irritated."-- ii. 442. 2. Engelbert,
Card. Archbishop of Malines.--"I thought, however, that I ought to add, that in
these regions (and especially in the neighbouring kingdoms of France and
Holland) there are ecclesiastics, conspicuous for piety, knowledge, and
prudence, who, although they acknowledge that great advantage would arise from
an Apostolic decree, whereby it should be enacted, that all must believe of
Divine faith, that the most Blessed Virgin was preserved from original stain,
since thereby larger honour would accrue to the most Holy Deipara, and the
faithful would conceive yet greater reverence towards her, and would be kindled
more and more to worship her, fear lest very great inconveniences should arise
from it. They fear especially lest heretics and unbelievers, who, in journals
and other writings dispersed everywhere do not cease to attack the faith, should
derive thence fresh ground for calumniating the Catholic Church, as though it
were devising new doctrines, and paying undue cultus to the most Holy Mother of
God. Whence also it might follow that many, who now seem ready to embrace the
faith, might start back from their purpose. If, then, having heard the report of
the most eminent Divines) Doctors, Cardinals, and other distinguished men, to
whom the examination of that most grave matter has been committed, your Holiness
should judge that the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of God is to be
defined as a Catholic dogma, perhaps it will be better to explain the Divine
tradition clearly and luminously in the Apostolic decree, that it may be plain
that nothing new is enacted, but that the ancient faith of the Church is alone
declared and confirmed. For thus it may be hoped that the month of the malicious
may be stopped, or at least the defenders of the faith may more readily refute
their calumnies.

"Then, seeing that in these times those who have care of souls are compelled in
moral matters to interpret the laws favorably [to men's wishes], and to use
great indulgence, because the faith of many is langxrid and charity is cold,
those same men doubt whether it is expedient at this day to bring in a new
obligation in a matter of doctrine, as to which not only there is no
controversy, but it is extended more and more with a marvellous consent of all
Catholics. For they fear lest perchance in countries in which there are
theologians, who groundlessly deny the infallibility of the Roman See in
defining dogmas of faith, some

[174]

may arise even out of the Clergy themselves, who, out of the itch of writing
which there prevails, may with rash boldness openly impugn the Apostolic decree,
and so raise public scandal. These doubts and these fears I report, most Blessed
Father, simply that your Holiness may clearly know the state of things, and
provide by a fitting remedy for any inconveniences, if it should seem that any
are to be apprehended."--pp. 447, 448. 1. Italy. The Bishop of Adria.--"I know
that the gates of hell cannot prevail against this rock founded by Christ; yet
we must beware lest we give occasion to our enemies, that it should be assailed
with new wars, which will, I am horribly afraid, be the case, if the Church
after so many centuries exhibit to the faithful to be believed a new mystery, of
which we find no testimony in the Scriptures or holy fathers, if we except many
allegories spoken of the Eternal Wisdom. 2. "But what if very many faithful,
who, while the world rages, persevere still in the faith? I fear lest they too
suffer scandal, rather than be built up. For faith in the Immaculate Conception
of the Blessed Virgin Mother is so deeply settled in their minds, that they do
not allow themselves even to doubt its truth. Where is room for suspicion? The
Bishops continually discourse thereon in their homilies, the Parish Priests in
their catechizings, Preachers in their sermons. What, when they know by the new
decree of this holy See, that that was for so many ages uncertain which they
held for certain, and which was everywhere announced as so certain? If we were
deceived in this,' they will say, perhaps we are mistaken and deceived about
other mysteries of faith too,'' or perhaps they will allow themselves to doubt
of the truth of the same."--i. 317. 3. The Bishop of Mondavi.--"But whether the
arguments, which they who at this day uphold this pious opinion, derived whether
from Scripture or tradition and the almost universal zeal of the Church of the
present time, suffice to prove that it ought to be transferred to a dogma of
faith, if they be compared with what the fathers of the Councils of Florence,
Lateran, and Trent, have uttered on this subject, and very chief theologians
have discussed, I should fear to affirm. Nor, now that prayers have been poured
out to God through the whole diocese, is it given to me to dare to do so. And I
own that I am withheld by the same doubt, when I consider the fitting season of
the aforesaid definition which, since it is not of necessity to salvation, it
seems to some may with greater advantage be put off to happier times of the
Church. None of these difficulties, however, would perhaps arise, if it were
only defined that the Church rightly promotes the cultus of the Immaculate
Conception of Mary, yet so that the contrary opinion cannot be ever accounted
heretical."--iii. 144. 4. The Cardinal Bishop of Viterbo and Toscanella.--"Two
classes of the faithful are to be distinguished, the learned and unlearned. The
unlearned, speaking of the Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, suppose and
believe de fide that it was most exempt from all stain, and therefore do not
think it a matter liable to be disputed, and so neither to be defined by the
Apostolic See; wherefore, from ignorance, they neither have, nor can have any
wish about it. The learned have not all the same mind or wish. Although all now
hold most firmly that the most Blessed Virgin was conceived without any stain
whatever, they are not unanimous that it is necessary or convenient to define it
by a dogmatic judgment of the Holy See. Some wish such decision; others think it
ought not to be proceeded to, especially considering the circumstances of the
times. 5. "For myself, I own ingenuously, that on the one side, from my
observance and devotion to the most Holy Virgin, I wish that your Holiness
should number the mystery of the Immaculate Conception too among the articles of
faith; yet, on the other, weighing the reasons adduced by many most grave
theologians, and especially by the most Eminent Cardinal Gotti, in his discourse
on this controversy, exhibited to Clement XII., and recently published at Home,
I feel myself vehemently urged to judge that, in the present state of things,
and especially in the coldness and infirmity of faith and religion at this day,
it is more useful not to proceed further in so weighty a matter."--iii. 33, 34.
6. The Archbishop of Urbino.--"As to the necessity of publishing any definition,
I do not think that there is any. For the Immaculate Conception of the most
Blessed Virgin has no such close connexion with the other articles of faith (at
least as far as I know), that, if this privilege were denied, it'would follow
that any of those articles should be impugned. But this being removed, I see not
from what other head this

real necessity should be extracted.

"Whether this definition should be held to be opportune, I confess that I still
doubt. I have again and again weighed the ending of all contentions, the
dissipating of doubt, maintenance of truth, greater-glory of God, prais e of the
Virgin, hope most sweet of new benefits to the good of the Church militant, and
other grounds, which seem to support such opportuneness, and I have always owned
them to be most excellent. But the peril of perdition which may come to some
from the definition, makes me doubt, now as ever, whether it is opportune. For
although, as seems to me, it is now sounder to hold the Immaculate Conception of
the most Blessed Virgin, and less sound to doubt it, and altogether folly openly
to deny it, yet since, in these most unhappy times, the number of those is very
great, who do not hesitate to question, or altogether to impugn, all the dogmas
of the Church, yea, and the existence of God too, with the ruin of many, there
seems to be a probable peril that they will the more easily impugn this doctrine
too; and that thence will follow the perdition of those, who, lightly esteeming
the definition of the Church, seduced by perverse discourses, will either not
embrace the pious opinion, or, having embraced, will desert it, or at least be
unable to lay aside their doubts. Nor does it seem difficult for the malice of
the ungodly to pervert in this the understandings of the simple, since we see it
done in more evident truths; and since the example of those, who, in past time,
though distinguished for learning and holiness, are thought to have denied this
privilege, may be very moving; and because, apart from the authority of the
Church, the theological grounds do not seem to be so consequent, as to leave no
room for the possibility of the contrary, nor so transparent, that at the first
glance this truth should be clear to any one. Since, then, there seems to be
this evident, or at least probable peril of perdition, which would be imminent
to some, though perhaps few, even of those who are now counted among such as
have been gained to Christ, I should not fully believe it opportune to add
dogmatic certainty to this truth.

"I say this, most Holy Father, with inmost grief of heart; but the necessity of
charity seems to require it of me to consult alike for the salvation of the wise
and the unwise; and the example of the Apostolic See itself moves me thereto,
which hitherto seemed to have been made weak to the weak, that it may gain the
weak ,' wishing that those who hold the contrary shoukVneither Bin, nor be
heretics."

The Archbishop of Urbino appended to this response a letter to the same effect,
which he had written Nov. 10, 1847, to the Bishop of Fano, who had urged him to
ask for the decree. He used there the same topics, and quoted the maxim of
Sixtus III., that treating of dogmas, "nihil addi convenit vetustati."--

iii. 43 --45. 1. The Bishop of Ancona and Umana.--"Having asked aid of God, I
venture to opine that it is best to adopt that mode of defining, which should be
free from all asperity, viz. by deciding directly that the Church is not
deceived as to the truth of the object proposed by this cultus, whereby the
immunity of the Blessed Virgin from all stain in the first moment of her
Conception is celebrated; and that the Church does not err, when, according to
the pious true opinion to be held by all, she proposes that the immunity of the
Holy Mother of God from all fault in the first instant of her Conception should
be celebrated. 2. "But since the sanction of this opinion necessarily involves
the disapproval and proscription of the contrary, which no few eminent and
learned man held determinedly, men of eminent deserts towards the Christian
religion, some account ought, it seems, to be had of them, that the words of the
decree should be softened, and no note be branded on the advocates of the
contrary opinion; and that it should be so concluded, that the authors of the
opposite opinion should be said to have expressed the contrary out of love of
truth; and the more, because they were destitute of those supports which came in
afterwards, and which, burning as they were with piety to Mary, would have
inclined them to the opinion which now prevails."-- ii. 153. 3. The Bishop of
Cervia.--"If I turn to weigh what is the rigorous imp ort of a solemn, and that
a direct declaration of any dogma, as de fide, no slight difficulties float as
clouds over my mind, and I do not in any way ascertain which opinion I ought to
prefer. That saying of Vincent of Lerins must move me, received as a rule by all
theologians, and constantly observed, whenever it was the question of
distinguishing or defining dogmas of faith, what was always, everywhere, by all,
received as a dogma of faith, and has been believed till now. Every Catholic
dogma, being a fact manifest to us by Divine

revelation, can neither be known nor proved, save by the work of God, written or
handed down; and, since God could, either expressly or implicitly, by Scripture
or tradition, reveal a truth unattainable by human intellect or reason, the
Church never proposes any truth as a dogma to be received and believed by all,
under pain of anathema or heresy, unless it be contained explicitly, or at least
implicitly, in the Word of God, written or handed down. But some theologians
contend, that this could scarcely be affirmed as to the proposed truth. For, had
it been expressly or implicitly revealed in Scripture or tradition, how should
older Fathers, and Doctors, Theologians, and the whole order of Dominicans, and
the whole school of the Thomists, not only be ignorant of it, but venture, with
all their might and vehement abundance of argument [assail it], the Supreme
Pontiffs conniving, or at least not condemning as heretics those who for many
ages opposed with their whole strength the Conception,'immaculate at the first
instant'? On what ground was that most wise, and, above all the OEcumenical
Councils held in the Church, most learned Council of Trent, unwilling to define
this truth expressly but left it in its own possession' and statu quo, yet with
that prudence and precision of words, that a grave and reverent weight should be
added to establish and strengthen so pious and Catholic a truth, yet not to
advance it to the sublimity of a dogma by a judgment and unalterable decree?
There was a deep silence as to this truth in the first centuries; in subsequent
centuries it was controverted, which would not have been, if in any of the above
ways the Church had owned it as either expressly or implicitly revealed. Else we
should fall into the heresy of Lutherans and un-Catholics, who, no less absurdly
than impiously, tattle that the Church was obscured after the Apostolic times,
the light of faith being almost extinguished, and that true dogmas were involved
in the darkness of ignorance, &c.

"It must be confessed that all dogmas were not always believed in the Church
with a solemn and open faith, which now, errors having been defeated, we profess
with a noble and universal belief. Yet scarce did error dare to raise its
venomous head, but the Church too did not keep silence: it took arms, and gained
an entire triumph over the rash attempt.

"The question, which now occupies minds, does not relate to the truth of the
Immaculate Conception, as is clear. For it is so supported by most solid
arguments, and engraven on the minds of all, that the opposite opinion is
rejected by the faithful as a manifest error. This truth, so sweet, so sublime,
and to be cherished, remains unconquered, and now very near to faith; yet so,
that the doubt is not lost out of sight or mind, whether it be dogmatically
definable de fide, as mysteries, which are proposed to all by the Church, to be
believed by an act of faith under pain of heresy.' For although all dogma is
truth, yet not conversely is all truth dogma. God willed not to reveal to us all
truths, as of the end of the world and the time of His Second Advent, and many
others, which John confesses to be unwritten, and so many, that if they had been
written, they would fill the world. Many of the most profound Theologians of the
first rank, whom P. Perrone mentions, have impugned its definability, chiefly on
the ground that it cannot be plainly extracted either from Scripture or
tradition as de fide. The Church, taught by the Holy Spirit, cannot deceive the
faithful in teaching; but it does not frame new and impervious dogmas, but
either explains or proposes to be believed what occur, as expressly or
implicitly revealed. But all do not agree as to this express or implicit
revelation: the divine revelation then remains as yet doubtful, or at least
inevident, and consequently the foundation necessary for directly promulging a
dogmatic definition fails altogether."--ii. 217--219.

41. The Archbishop of Otranto.--"As to my own opinion, I should think (I speak
as one unwise') that such a declaration is not at all necessary, both because
there are not, as in past ages, any disagreements among Catholics as to this
privilege of the Blessed Virgin, no enemy, no controversy in the schools; and
they who once supported the opposite opinion, panegyrize this privilege in the
preaching of the Word of God; and all Churches, during Mass, gladly praise God
for the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, as also because the
chief end of any decree or dogmatic declaration is already obtained, such a
cultus throughout the world as should seem to need no new accession of piety.
Yet I am constrained to confess that the grounds, whereon this privilege of the
Blessed Virgin rests, are of such weight, that they ought to induce any Catholic
to believe it de fide. In my opinion then there are all the grounds of
probability to induce me to assert that this privilege of the Immaculate
Conception of the Blessed Virgin

Mary may be declared a dogma of faith.

"Yet I should think that, if the Church should judge that it should come to this
declaration, out of many forms which she has at times used in defining a dogma
of faith, it would be most prudent to use that, whereby the dogma of the
privilege should be defined indirectly as the subject-matter, but directly the
infallibility of the Church which teaches it, which formula the Tridentine
Fathers at times used, Sess. xxiv.

c. 7. If any say that the Church errs when it teaches,'" &c.--ii. 365, 366.

42. The Archbishop of Perugia.--"I should think that, before any definition is
published, some account should be had of that difficulty which the adversaries
cease not to proclaim loudly, that not without wrong would so many most wise
men, who, either with the assent or at least the permission of the Church,
adopted with impunity the opposite opinion, be proscribed at one blow, and
punished with the note of heresy, and so (unless your Blessedness should think
of any other mode of satisfying as far as possible this specious difficulty),
the words of the decree should be so tempered for the former Theologians, that
all, even the slightest, occasion of new complaints should be removed."-- ii.
290.

Three weeks afterwards he united with the Archbishop of Spoleto, two other
Archbishops and fifteen Bishops, in earnestly imploring the issue of the decree,
on account of "the increased devotion to the Blessed Virgin which it would
occasion, and the help and defence which she, so honoured and invoked under this
title, would give to the whole Christian people and the Holy Roman Church." He
did not, however, withdraw the above wish.--ii. 379--81. 1. b) The Bishop of
Santorino.--"Although most devoted to the Immaculate Conception of the most Holy
Mother, they [his Chapter and Clergy] did not deem it suitable, in these
calamitous times of general confusion, to decide the question of the Conception.
The speaker, moreover, who stood forward in the name of the rest, said that he
thought it more advisable that the question of the Immaculate Conception should
continue undecided, because the devotion of the people was deeply rooted; and
that to bring it to a decision and make it an article of faith would perhaps be
an obstacle in the case of attempting union with the Greek schismatics, it not
being possible to prove it by clear arguments from Scripture and the Fathers,
but merely by the argument of congruity. Thus far this Canon. Had he, however,
said that in the case of the Protestants it would have given rise to new
disputes, all very good; but as for the Greeks, I do not see either that union
with them is a likely thing to happen immediately, or that they have any rights:
and, besides, the Greeks believe in and celebrate the festival of the Conception
of the Blessed Virgin by S. Anne, which is what the Catholics also say and
believe." He himself held, as decisive, the texts "full of grace," "the power of
the Highest shall overshadow thee," "she shall bruise thy head; "nondum erant
abyssi, et ego jam concepta eram "(Prov. viii.), "Fecit potentiam in brachio
suo," and this, "ab initio creaturæ."--i. 201. 2. The Bishop of Majorca.--"To
these most pious wishes, longings, feelings, the Bishop of Majorca (to express
at length his own mind), knowing well how much (in things which in any way
appertain to faith) that criterion is to be accounted of, which is not unfitly
called an instinct of piety, infused into the hearts of the faithful by
inspiration of God, viz., the unanimous feeling of Pastors and faithful, or of
the whole Catholic Church, especially when Holy Scripture and the holy Fathers,
the chief witnesses of tradition, are either altogether silent, or speak
somewhat obscurely, or do not so agree together in attesting it, that their
opinion can be certainly known, nor can any certainty be arrived at, through
their aid, what was handed down from the beginning of the Catholic Church.

"No testimony is, in truth, found in Scripture which any so clear tradition has
explained, as to be equal to the passing of a dogmatic judgment and to be a
stable foundation thereof, although in some one, perhaps, the meaning may
perhaps lie hid, as the germ in the seed. Some Fathers seem to oppose the pious
opinion,' especially S. Bernard and the Angelic Doctor, whose words S.
Antoninus, Abp. of Florence, asserted to be twisted by the defenders of the
Immaculate Conception against their intention; others, as S. Bonaventura, seem
at one time to support the one opinion, at onother the opposite. But it is
marvellous and worthy of consideration, that the sayings of the Holy Fathers,
whereby the Immaculate Conception is impugned, at least in appearance, are found
to have been for the most part written or spoken, when, as Doctors and
Theologians, they were discussing the doctrine of faith by the light of the
Divine word, written or handed down; contrariwise, what has been wont to be
adduced in behalf of the singular privilege of the

Virgin, whether in plain or equivalent terms, is taken almost entirely from
sermons, prayers, hymns, and praises, when they expressed the affection of the
heart towards the most benignant Mother rather than the judgment of the mind,
the feelings of piety rather than the opinion of the understanding. Nay, the
words of certain Fathers, which seem self-contradictory, may perhaps be
reconciled in this way? that some attest the obscurity of Scripture and
tradition in their eyes, some explain their inmost feelings, which led the
Fathers and orthodox writers from the very birth of the Church to extol the
integrity of the Virgin Mother from all spot with so many distinguished and
elegant praises, yet so as sometimes to enunciate explicitly the mystery of the
Conception. For the vehicles of tradition cannot be said to be clear, viz.,
sayings of Fathers, practice of the Church, sacred liturgies, and consent or
persuasion of the faithful as to so excellent a privilege, since those most
clear-sighted Bernard and Aquinas, Orators of the Blessed Virgin, did not see
it. There lurked in the heart, and sometimes there burst forth in flames, as it
were, that divine ardour and inmost feeling whereby the whole Church was borne
to extol and celebrate the dignity and excellence of the Mother of God, than
which no greater can be conceived under God. The opinion as to the Immaculate
Conception had its germ, was cherished, grew, through the implanted warmth of
piety, seizing step by step on the sacred rites of outward worship, the
universities, and the minds of the faithful. Yet not so rapidly did it pervade
the minds of the learned, who, in scholastic method, especially under the
guidance of Aquinas and the Master of the Sentences, evolved the testimonies of
the Bible and the ancient Fathers as to original sin (among whom are Card.
Caietan, Melchior Cano, and other most excellent Theologians), until silence
being imposed by the supreme Pontiffs on the opposite party, and the Feast of
the Conception being sanctioned, there now remains no country, city, college, or
community which does not, from the inmost heart, venerate that mystery. Although
then, perhaps, some are not wanting, who, sincerely using the cultus of the
Immaculate Conception in heart and external practice in order to obey the
Pontifical decrees, yet in their inner judgment of the mind do not assent to it
as a dogma of revelation (of which number were the most illustrious P. de
Herrera and Master Vincent Ferré, whose MS. elucubrations are certainly extant
at Salamanca, perhaps elsewhere); yet at present there is doubtless a common
feeling of the faithful, a consent of the living instruction of Pastors with
their wishes; there is in the Church a wondrous conspiracy of minds who profess
the privilege of Mary, to which our safest criterion of the mystery which lurked
obscurely under the veil of Scripture and the folds of primitive tradition, it
pleased the Holy Spirit to reserve a clearer revelation in process of time.

"The aim of all this, most Blessed Father, is, that while the Bishop of Majorca,
giving his judgment, so subscribes to the truth of the Immaculate Conception,
that else the Holy Spirit would seem to him to have deserted the Catholic
Church, he at the same time estimates the difficulties which might arise out of
the dogmatic definition, on account of the number and authority of distinguished
Doctors who dissent, of the odium cast on the opposite opinion; and lastly
(unless it seem otherwise to the prudence of the Supreme Pastor, led by the
hand, as it were, by the Holy Spirit), the Bishop does not, on reflection, see
any reason why that most safe way, trodden by the Council of Trent and your
Predecessors, should be deserted, who thought good not to decide or define any
thing dogmatically which had not been decided before, although Bishops,
Congregations of religious, flourishing Universities, most powerful Kings and
Princes who had deserved well of the Church, urged it. Of a truth, the cultus of
this great mystery has so prevailed throughout the whole world, that it could
hardly be carried further by a dogmatic definition, as other mysteries also of
the Nativity and Assumption of the Virgin Mary, which have most solid foundation
in ancient tradition, are celebrated throughout the world, without the faithful
anywhere being anxious about their dogmatic definition, not from any
carelessness about sacred things, but being content with the reverence which
they entertain and manifest towards the Divine Mother.

"But, most Blessed Father, your Holiness, placed in the highest watch-tower of
the Church, and approaching nearer to the light from above, by the office of the
Apostolate and singular piety towards the Mother of God, will, by the Divine
inspiration, understand and certainly know in what way the opinion of the
Immaculate Conception ought to be confirmed, or more or less directly defined by
a solemn judgment, which judgment of your Holiness, whatsoever it may be,"
&c.--ii. 157--160.

44. The Bishop of Lugo.--"But as our humble opinion also is asked, not only upon
the ground of

the doctrine, but also on the convenience and utility of the authoritative
declaration of it, perhaps our agreement in this particular may not be so
general or comprehensive. In Spain already no Academical Degrees are received in
the Schools, nor is any Collation to Prebends or Ecclesiastical Benefices
allowed, whether the Benefice be with or without cure of souls .... without the
previous requirement of an oath expressly made, to defend the mystery of the
Immaculate Conception.....I do not therefore understand,-- and some of our
first-rate Theologians are of the same judgment with me,--that there is any
necessity or expediency in now proceeding to the declaration, which certain
persons, carried along by their tender devotion towards the most Holy Virgin,
are soliciting from your Holiness: for there would be no augmentation made by
this means to the devotion and unbounded confidence in the protection of the
Queen of Angels; on the contrary, it would in some measure go to impair that
confidence by depriving the pious opinion of its voluntary character, adopted,
without being made a dogma of faith; in that it holds it as a duty to our Lady
to attribute to her the gift of original purity: for we thus understand the
honour, rather than that she was set free from the guilt of the children of Adam
after having contracted it. Notwithstanding, it is possible that in this opinion
we may deceive ourselves, as we should deceive ourselves if we believed it was a
greater honour to Jesus Christ and His holy Mother to descend only from holy
women, and not to reckon in this genealogy Tha-mar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba,
the four specially marked with dishonourable stains among the people of Judah.
Wherein is seen how different the judgment of men is wont to be from the
judgment of God, which we can only know by the revelation made of it in Holy
Scripture and constant tradition of the old Fathers, as the Universal Church has
understood and understands them.

"My opinion therefore is, most Holy Father, keeping in view these reasons which
I have slightly intimated, that there is no express mention in Holy Scripture,
nor in consistent Tradition, of the exclusion of the most Holy Virgin from the
general mass of mankind which sinned in Adam; and that it is not expedient, even
supposing that I deceive myself in the opinion which I have formed, to declare
as a point of doctrine that which is only a pious persuasion. Nevertheless, if
your Holiness should judge and define otherwise, I, for my part, as a faithful
and obedient son of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, will submit my heart and
mind to the decisions of its supreme Chief. Yet I venture to entreat your
Holiness, that, supposing you decide the pious persuasion to be a point of
Faith, you will condescend to adopt such modification of it as you may judge to
be most suitable, that the great defender of the Church, S. Thomas Aquinas, may
continue to hold the distinguished and honourable place which the Church itself
on very solemn occasions has granted him."-- ii. 98. 1. The Bishop of
Zamora.--"But as regards the mode of defining, your excellent prudence and
wisdom will judge what is most right, and the same as to formulas of words; and
this only he [the Bishop] suppliantly desires, that no note be branded upon the
supporters of the opposite judgment, who nourished before and after the
aforesaid Council of Trent."--i. 415. 2. The Bishop of Iaca.--"I cannot
dissemble, that the Church has not been wont to publish her dogmatic decisions,
except when compelled by a sort of necessity, especially the impugning of
heretics, and that in our days they wage no special war against the Immaculate
Conception of the Virgin, which perhaps would burst out anew if a definition
were asked for. But I am fully persuaded that no account is to be had of
heretics in this matter, since their learned and instructed teachers have passed
over in great measure into rationalism, and have sunk in the deep, despising
these and all other controversies of this sort. The same judgment is not to be
passed as to Catholics, who, if in any numbers they impugned the Immaculate
Conception, might cause some trouble. But since those who, in our time, do not
acquiesce in the pious opinion,' seem to be few, I trust that they will not (out
of a sort of reverence to the Doctors who hitherto thought otherwise) resist the
votes of the Church everywhere, when weighed and solemnly pronounced by your
Holiness.....

"I have explained my own opinion as to this most grave controversy. But I think
it not unadvisable to inform your Holiness that there are, in the very
celebrated University of Salamanca, where I long taught Greek, some Doctors of
Divinity, of no low rank, who, so far from holding that the Word of God written
or handed down favours the pious opinion, contend determinedly that it is
contrary thereto; and who hold

most firmly that the definition ought to be abstained from altogether, as not at
all necessary, they say, to the life of the Church, and as likely, perhaps, to
occasion division and tumult. I had lately a great discussion hereon, by letter,
with my master, F. P. Sanchez, a Doctor in Theology of Salamanca, of the
Dominicans, whom I thought that I ought to consult, as being eminent in all
sorts of learning, extremely well versed in Theology, and thoroughly acquainted
with the whole history and turns of this question. Moreover he took with him two
MSS. in folio from the library of the Convent of S. Stephen in Salamanca (when,
the tempest raging, all the Spanish families of religious were expelled from
their convents): the one, a copy of which is said to be in the Vatican,
elaborated by M. Herrera, the most wise moderator of the first class of Theology
at Salamanca, afterwards a Bishop; the other, elaborated by M. Ferré^580 with
unwearied toil, to prove the assertion of Maracci to be false, who affirms that
both Greek and Latin Fathers are on the side of the pious opinion. He weighs
them all one by one, cites editions, chapters, pages, and at last concludes that
that saying of S. Antoninus of the defenders of the Immaculate Conception is
most true, that they twist the sayings of the ancients against the intention of
the speakers.' I own that I have not read these MSS., which, it is said, ought
to be highly accounted of, nor can I give any judgment of my own about them; but
I have no doubt that that saying of my master is most true, that there is
nothing missing in them, which can avail to throw great light on all this
question, nothing which has not been examined and weighed; so that they should
be waited for, as master-works, treating the controversy thoroughly and most
copiously, and as magazines, from which the adversaries may draw their
arguments, both to impugn the Immaculate Conception and to throw discredit on
the object of the definition. I wish then, most Blessed Father, that these two
MSS. should be examined by the Theological body, with the aid of your Holiness,
before any thing be decreed on this most grave question, lest we should incur
that censure, Whoso decrees any thing, one side unheard, though he decree what
is just, is himself not just.'" i. 480.

46. b) The Bishop of Santander.--"I say, if it be ripe for a definition,'
because there are some here, who, although they shrink from imagining that Mary
was conceived in original sin, yet think that her immunity from this stain was
not revealed by God through Scripture or the tradition of the Church, but was
left only to the piety and reverence of the faithful. For since there are many
truths, which are not certainly to be revealed to men, except in their heavenly
home, such as are, perhaps, those which maintain that S. John Baptist was ever
free from any even light fault of speech, and S. Joseph, the spouse of the most
pure Virgin, from any stain concerning chastity; these think that of the number
of these truths is this also, which maintains the immunity of the most Blessed
Mother of God from original guilt. For sought out, say those who thus think, and
too far-fetched are those arguments, whereby some celebrated writers contend
that they demonstrate that this pious opinion is proximately definable. Too
twisted are the interpretations whereby they endeavour to draw over to their
side others, who are even openly opposed to it; so that one may now, too, say of
them, what S. Antoninus said formerly of their leaders (Summ. part. v. lib. 8,
c. 2), They twist their sayings (those of ancient and modern doctors) against
the intention of the speakers.' And they say that they have found a notable
instance of such forced interpretation in a celebrated dissertation on this
subject, published a few years ago by a most eminent man. For in it (at least as
it was published in Spanish in 1847) Melchior Cano is counted among writers who
supported the pious opinion, whereas neither did he utter the words adduced in
confirmation thereof in his own person, but in the person of those who impugn
the authority of the Holy Fathers; nor do those words signify other than that
the opinion of the immunity of the most Holy Virgin from original sin is pious
and praiseworthy, which any one who estimates things fairly would in such
questions, not defined by the Church, doubt not readily to confess of the
opinion adverse to his own.

^580 Narvaez (1. c. p. 56) mentions another learned Spanish writer on the same
side: "A Dominican father, Vincentius de Bandelis of New Castille, who, as that
most wise Pontiff, Lord Benedict XIV., says (de festo

V. M., c. xv., de festo Conceptionis, n. 8), maintained the opinion contrary to
the Immaculate Conception, printed and published a treatise on the subject,
whose title is, On the singular purity and prerogative of the Conception of our
Saviour Jesus Christ, on the authorities of 260 most illustrious Doctors.'"

"So these think, more freely perchance than is meet."--i. 424, 425. 1. The
Bishop of Chiapo in Mexico.--"Omitting what all know, that the adapted or
allegorical meaning, unless inspired writers themselves have in other places so
employed it, does not yield any firm argument in Theological matters, I wish to
use the words of a Theologian of the first rank, and one of the chief
maintainers of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin, F. F. Suarez,
who says when writing thereon, You must not ask for any clear passage from
Scripture, where this should be asserted, for it would be rash to require this,
when other privileges of the Virgin, which the Church holds for certain, do not
require such testimony of Scripture. And in respect to tradition, he says, that
it is worthy of consideration that the ancient Fathers have said little of this
privilege of the Virgin,' having said before, as to the sanctification of the
Blessed Virgin in the womb, This truth is not expressly defined, nor handed down
as of faith.' And S. Thomas, who had read the writings of the Fathers better,
perhaps, than any, did not find it, I say not handed down as of faith,' but not
in any way; else, doubtless, he would never have maintained the contrary. I am
aware how many have strained with all their might to detach this most eminent
Saint therefrom; but in vain, as I think; since in so many places of his works,
especially the Summa, in which, last of all and expressly, he treated this
question, he taught it most openly, on account of the reverence due to the
general sayings of Holy Scripture, and because there was as yet no leaning of
the Church towards the pious opinion. Pétau again, another of the more eminent
Theologians, and most versed in the Fathers, although he contended for the
Immaculate Conception of the most Holy Virgin, did not find it clearly handed
down to them. If then, as is evident, the truth of the Immaculate Conception is
not found so expressed in the Holy Scriptures that it can be proposed to the
people as a dogma of faith; if it is not clear in the writings of the holy
Fathers that it was always, everywhere, and by all' handed down, and much more
handed down as of faith, since neither was her sanctification in the womb (which
was easier), as Suarez asserts, so handed down; since I have no qualifications
which enable me to decide better than S. Thomas or at least Pétau, what is
contained in tradition thereon; since neither did the Fathers, who remained at
Basle, and who left nothing untried to settle this matter, define it in this
sense; and since those words, whereby the most Blessed Virgin is called
Immaculate,' may be understood, like those in 2 Pet. iii. 12, Wherefore, most
dearly beloved, considering these things, be diligent, that ye may be found of
Him immaculate in peace,' not without great grief of heart, most Blessed Father,
I dare not give a suffrage for the declaration of the aforesaid truth as a dogma
of faith. Let, then, that most firm truth abide among all, yet with that
certainty, wherewith the Assumption of the most Blessed Virgin into heaven, with
body and soul at once, is believed, although it is not held as a dogma of faith.
I have been not a little delayed, because a religious' man, who had done good
service in literature with others whom I called that I might have the more
light, only on the 16th of April last, showed me a work of some magnitude,
elaborated with great care, and chiefly derived from the seraphic
treasure-house, without examining which, from the desire I had of embracing a
different opinion, I did not think it at all reasonable to deliver my judgment.
2. "Although this has not happened [that his opinion had been changed], and what
I have said notwithstanding, if the Immaculate Conception of the most Holy
Virgin be defined by your Holiness, or by any successor of yours, should I not
myself be departed, I will receive it with the greatest exultation, and with my
whole heart, and will defend it with all my power."--T. ix., App. i. 19, 20. 3.
Vicar Apostolic of Mysore.--"Although we are all by nature children of wrath,
even although all perished in the first Adam, yet it is not repugnant either to
my faith or reason to admit a marvellous and free exception as to the most
Blessed Virgin in fact; nay, it seems to me in the highest degree congruous,
that there should have been such an exception; whence I believe, by a faith of
nature (naturaliter credo'), that God gave such a privilege with many other
gifts of His free mercy to the Blessed Virgin Mary. But because neither Holy
Scripture nor ancient tradition prove sufficiently clearly that such exemption
from the stain of original sin was granted to the Blessed Virgin Mary, I cannot,
believe it with a Divine faith. On the other side, considering that the Word of
God had no repugnance to many other indignities in the life of His ancestors
according to the flesh, both men and women, by parity of reason, it might have
been absolutely, that He should have taken a Mother who had the stain of a fault
strictly not her own, at least in the original moment [of her being]; whence my
opinion, therefore, stands only in the natural sense of fittingness

towards my Redeemer, and in the pious desire of glory and veneration towards His
most beloved Mother.

"Fearing, lest Protestants and philosophers, objecting that such a decision, as
de fide, is contrary to the Catholic axiom, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab
omnibus,' and muttering that the Roman Church imposes mere opinions under pain
of damnation, should also refuse most certain dogmas; and, moreover, not clearly
seeing that the confidence of Christians as to the most pure Mary, or their
fervour in the cultus of Mary, the refuge of sinners, can be increased by such a
decision; especially being unwilling at this time to impose, as de fide, and
under pain of damnation, an opinion which was free for eighteen centuries, and
which, although thoroughly examined by many most pious and most learned
Pontiffs, has yet always been undecided, with the most profound submission to
the future judgment of your Holiness, I can in no way desire such a definition,
and am compelled by my conscience so to confess."--iii. 353.

49. The Vicar Apostolic of Coimbatoor.--"Although, I repeat, I have no doubt as
to the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin, I cannot but fear that from
the definition of that doctrine as an article of faith some evils would arise to
the Church; I cannot but fear that such a definition (saving the reverence due
to the many and most pious theologians who urge it) bears on its front a certain
appearance of novelty, and diminishes the force and majesty of tradition, the
firmness whereof will hereafter be more and more to be desired.

"Doubtless, if the Holy See shall declare the Immaculate Conception of the
Blessed Virgin Mary an article of revealed faith, it will thereby define that
the tradition was always such (for I think that this revelation will never be
rested on Scripture alone, which seems to me yet more perilous). This will
suffice for one who is firm and constant in the faith. But as to those weaker in
the faith, whose weakness will always be to be indulged, the grounds of this
tradition, resting on which the Church delivers the definition, are to be
weighed. No easy task. Notwithstanding the pious attempts and industry of more
recent theologians, must we not confess that their demonstrations, though
rigorous, are not mostly easy to the conception of the faithful? But ifc seems
to me of great moment that tradition, on other grounds most precious (which will
be an anchor of safety in the storms whereby Mother Church will still be
tossed), should be found clear and conspicuous to the minds of all.

"Perhaps, most Blessed Father, I fear where no fear is. But I own I fear the
thick falsehood, which seems about to involve the human mind more and more.
Aided thereby, the prince of darkness will seduce many, unless we reverence
tradition most scrupulously. Let others boast the vain science of this world,
and assert that the world clay by day makes progress. I grieve to see mankind
casting itself headlong into an inevitable gulf of darkness. The portentous
abuses of printing, the venom of journals, which creeps even into uncivilized
nations, corrupt the minds, and turn them from the right path: licence in
writing, printing, and circulating everywhere all sorts of books, good or bad,
on any subject, with an unworthy mixture of sacred with profane, maintaining
error with a bold iron forehead; and under the appearance of sound philosophy or
theology propagating false doctrine, enveloped in artfully contrived subtleties,
so that the most wise laws of the Church hereon cannot be effectually maintained
even in empires wholly Catholic; these things, with many other causes, seem
likely to bring so great a disturbance on the intellect of men, that hereafter,
more perhaps than before, Catholics, mistrusting reasoning, but cleaving to the
documents of sacred tradition, will be compelled to acknowledge that only with
the certainty of faith, which has been believed, everywhere, always, and by
all.'

"To return; notwithstanding the pious industry of more recent theologians, and
their diligence in scrutinizing the works of the Fathers, and adducing every
thing which, directly or indirectly, evidently or inferentially, supports our
opinion, it remains difficult to prove, in my opinion, that the Immaculate
Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary was believed always, and especially that
it was believed everywhere. But will not minds, weak in the faith, be by that
difficulty put in danger of doubting not only the articles defined, but moreover
tradition itself, which was the shrine of this revelation? But hence what perils
are not to be feared for weak faith, to whose infirmity it is our office to be
indulgent?

"So then, most Blessed Father, I should prefer that the truth of the Immaculate
Conception of Mary should remain among truths which are generally admitted to be
piously believed.'"-- iii. 354, 355.

50. The Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin.--"It must be confessed, that there
are some

among us (I believe, very few), who are otherwise minded, and who think that it
has not been revealed with sufficient clearness, that the Holy Virgin Mary had
no ground to cry out like the other daughters of Adam, In sin did my mother
conceive me.--[S. Bernard, Ep. 174, n. 8.] Although they most readily
acknowledge that, through the foreseen merits of her future most Holy Son, He
who is mighty freed her immediately from original fault, and made her full of
richest graces. Now as to that, on which your Holiness vouchsafed chiefly to
inquire, whether or no it seems expedient for the advance of the glory of God,
that the Holy See should declare by a dogmatical decision, that it is to be
believed de fide, that the most Holy Virgin never, even in the first instant of
her Conception, bore the very slightest spot of sin, herein too the opinions are
different. For the greater part of the priests of this diocese think that the
time is come, when the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of the most Holy
Ever-Virgin Mary is known to be so universal, that it may and ought to be
promulgated as an article of faith. But no contemptible part of grave, pious,
and learned priests and laymen think otherwise; and although they believe
undoubtingly, that the Mother of the most Holy Saviour was always free from all
spot of original sin, they do not at all think it expedient, that such a
doctrine, however true, should be proposed to the faithful, to be believed as of
Divine faith; and that chiefly for these reasons: 1. A dogmatic decision of this
matter, on which there is no dissension, would seem to them contrary to the
practice of the Church, since hitherto such decisions have only been promulged
at such time as heretics dared to assail sound doctrine; and they are not aware
of any ground sufficiently grave for departing, in the present case, from the
ancient custom, and incurring the note of novelty. 2. The Immaculate Conception
of the Blessed Ever-Virgin Mary is believed peacefully almost everywhere, and is
assailed publicly by no one; and they think it much safer for the peace of
religion quieta non movere,' than under no pressure of necessity, to agitate the
question as to a new article of faith in the present state of minds, when men,
even Catholics, both in foreign parts and in Italy itself, are, alas! too much
inclined to examine, without due reverence, the limits of Ecclesiastical power.
3. They would hardly dare to hope that the devotion towards the most Blessed
Virgin, which already everywhere is lively in the hearts of the faithful, could
be much increased by the solemn decision that she was always Immaculate, since,
on the one side, the Church, which is already extensively attacked, would be
exposed to new assaults by embittered and ever-vigilant enemies, who would
doubtless seize occasion thence of chattering, Lo! the Church of the Catholics
has devised a new Article of faith after ages, which, as is evident, was not
believed everywhere, nor always, nor by all. What new light then dawns now upon
that Church, which was denied to its Council of Trent?' Such fallacies the
well-instructed Catholic will easily dissipate; but they think that it is to be
feared that the minds of the simple may be disturbed thereby, and their faith
also perchance shaken. 4. Lastly, they fear, lest many Protestants who, as they
hope, are now verging towards the Catholic Church, seeking a refuge there from
their ever-varying errors, may be driven further from us on account of this new
Article of faith, recently, as they will perhaps think, devised. These are some
of the reasons which move those whose minds I have explained, to desire
vehemently, unless the Holy Lord shall think differently, that nothing further
should be done therein at present.

"Among those who thus think are the Jesuit fathers at Dublin, almost all the
Professors of our national College at Maynooth, and many others, both priests
and laymen, conspicuous for zeal for religion. And knowing their most pious
feelings towards the Blessed Mother of God, and their desire that she should be
honoured and worshipped everywhere with most ardent devotion, I cannot hold
their opinion cheap; and therefore do not venture to advise that a dogmatic
decision should go forth from the Holy See, declaring that it is to be believed,
de fide, that the most Holy Virgin Mary was conceived without stain of original
sin,' however certain it be that that doctrine is true."--ii. 142--144.

He subsequently joined the other Roman Catholic Archbishops and Bishops in
praying the Pope to define it.--iii. 376--378.

The Archbishop of Tarragona left the question of expediency to the judgment of
the Pope (ii. 126). The Bishop of Oviedo said, "Perhaps the fulness of time has
come to declare this article" (ii. 229). The Archbishop of Braga desired it, "if
there was no reason to fear for other realms, as in this most religious nation
nothing is to feared" (i. 126). The Bishop of Lamego evidently leant to think it
inopportune: "Whether in the actual state of things the passing of such a
decision is more opportune than it was in the

time of some supreme Pontiffs of venerable memory, and of the most learned
fathers of the Council of Trent, I dare not give an opinion" (iii. 73).

So, I think, did the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon: "Whether for this longed-for
definition a more opportune time has now come; and those things are no longer to
be feared, which were a hindrance to the Tridentine fathers, and the supreme
Pontiffs; whether the present state of many nations, most turbulent and most
hostile to all authority, and the impious and most insidious efforts of
Protestants and of all enemies of the Catholic Church, who do not cease to
censure as new dogmas what are defined in the Catholic Church, and who endeavour
with their whole might to impugn the infallibility of that Church, the existence
of Divine tradition, and the authority of the Apostolic See, ought to cause some
delay to that longed-for and implored decree;--this, I think, to be left to thy
most wise and prudent judgment."--iii. 56, 57.

Narvaez (p. 48), counting the Bishops in Communion with Rome at 748, and those
who answered the Encyclical at 576, leaves 172 who did not answer, of whom,
allowing for vacancies, letters not reaching, &c., many like the Austrian
Bishops, must have been silent, because they did not wish to express their
dissent.

Narvaez gives, in strange contrast with 1864, this statement as to Cardinal
Bona: "Alexander VII., when asked by the ambassador of Philip IV. of Spain to
decide the Conception of the Blessed Virgin to be a dogma of faith, asked the
wise and pious Cardinal Bona, whether he could decide the question by himself?
The Cardinal answered, that neither the Holy See, nor the Church herself, can
form new articles of faith; that it can only declare what God has revealed to
His Church, after having examined the matter according to the rules of the
traditions transmitted by the Apostles.' The Pontiff replied, Can I decide what
is to be believed on this matter under inspiration of the Holy Ghost?' Cardinal
Bona said, Most Holy Father, if any thing should be revealed to you by God, this
will profit yourself alone; but it will not be lawful for you, nor can you bind
the faithful to adhere to your decision, as neither can you bind me.'"--pp. 91,
92.

One of the earliest fruits of the decision fell upon Spain, where the last
sacraments were refused to "Father Mr. Pascual who, until A.D. 1865, was the
oracle of Salamanca, and was held by learned men a fountain of religious wisdom,
gushing forth on all sides," because, "when interrogated by certain Bishops, he
wrote that the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin never could come to
be an article of faith, and never acknowledged the dogma, after the Lord Pope
Pius IX. pronounced it a dogma of faith, and did not recant." And yet
"inconsistently," Narvaez says," the divine office was said for his soul."--p.
54.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 4: NOTE C.
========================================================================

The Greek Church believes the Blessed Virgin to have been conceived in original
sin.

On this subject too, we are one with the Greek Church, and it is even, strange,
that of all the Bishops who returned answers, one only mentioned the Greeks as
likely to be kept away by this decision of the Latin Church apart, and he only,
summarily to overrule the objection as of less account than if it had been the
Protestants.

In regard to the belief of the Russian Church, my friend the Rev. G. Williams
has furnished me with the following references. No exception is made, as though
the Blessed Virgin had been exempt from the transmission of original sin to "all
who are naturally engendered of the offspring of Adam."

"1. Confessio orthodoxa of 1642, 3, which has very great authority in. the
Church."

"The sin from our first parents is the transgression of Divine law given in
Paradise to our forefather Adam, when it was said to him, Of the tree of
knowledge of good and evil ye shall not eat; but in the day that ye eat thereof
ye shall surely die.' This original (propatorikon) sin passed from Adam to the
whole human race, since we were all contained at that time in Adam. And thus
through the one Adam sin passed to us all. Therefore we are all conceived and
born with this sin, as the Holy Scripture teaches, By one man sin entered into
the world, and death by sin; and so death passed unto all men because in him all
sinned.' This original sin can be done away by no repentance, but only by the
grace of God. But it is abolished by the dispensation of our Lord Jesus Christ
in the Flesh, and the shedding of His precious Blood. And this takes place
through the mystery of holy Baptism; for whoso is not baptized, he is not free
from sin, but is a child of wrath and of everlasting punishment, according to
what is said (John iii. 5), Verily I say unto you, unless a man be born of water
and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." -- P. iii., qu. xx.,
Kimmel, Libri Symb. Eccl. Orient., pp. 272, 273.

In the Acts of the Synod at Giasion, in condemning Cyril Lucar for holding that
"all had been guilty of actual mortal sin," it professed that the teaching of
the Church was that none was exempt from original sin.

"The sixth, that he includeth all human nature under sin, not only original (as
our church confesseth), but also under that which springeth from it, being of
free choice and deadly (troairetikhn kai qanasimon), which he calls the fruits
of that, and exempting none from this (the deadly sin which maketh him who doeth
it condemned), neither him who is the greatest among those born of woman, nor
her the blessed among women,1 the spotless and Ever-Virgin Mary, or certain
Patriarchs or Prophets and Apostles, is condemned as alien from our faith."--§
6. Ib. pp. 410, 411.

"The Confession of Dositheus, Patriarch of Jerusalem: We believe that the first
man, created by God, fell in Paradise, neglecting the Divine command: he obeyed
the deceitful counsel of the serpent; and that thence, by succession, flowed
original sin; so that no one is born according to the flesh who does not bear
this burden, and who does not feel its fruits in this present hour. The fruits,
we say, and burden, not sin, such as ungodliness, blasphemy, murder, adultery,
fornication, hatred, and whatever else is gendered by wicked choice, not by
nature, contrary to the Divine will. For many, both of the Patriarchs and
Prophets, and very many others, both under the shadow [the Law], and the truth
[the Gospel], the divine forerunner

(S. John Baptist), and especially the Mother of the Divine Word, the Ever-Virgin
Mary, were not tempted by such and the like offences, but only [suffered] those
things which the Divine righteousness assigned as punishment to men for the
transgression, as the weariness of toil, afflictions, bodily weaknesses, pangs
of childbirth, laborious life in our pilgrimage, and lastly, bodily
death.'"--Decr. vi. pp. 432, 433.

A Russian layman, in vindicating the Greek Church on occasion of a "mandement"
of the Archbishop of Paris, says remarkably:

"This last time has seen an obligatory decree on a dogmatic question emanate
from the Pontifical throne. It is then an act completely ecclesiastic in the
highest sense of the word; and, as being the only one for many years, it
deserves special attention. This decree announces to all Christendom, and to
ages to come, that the Blessed Mother of the Saviour was exempt from all, even
original sin. But the Holy Virgin, did she not undergo death, like the rest of
mankind? She did. And death, is it not (as the Spirit of God said by the
Apostle) the penalty of sin? (lit. the wages of sin?) It is so no longer: by a
Papal decree it has become independent of sin; it has become a simple accident
of nature, and all Christendom is convicted of falsehood. Or the Blessed Virgin,
has she undergone death like Christ, making herself sin for others? We should
have two Saviours; and Christendom would again be convicted of falsehood. Lo,
how Divine mysteries manifest themselves to the Roman Communion; lo, the
heritage which she bequeathed to futurity!"--Quelques Mots sur les Communions
occidentales (Leipz., 1855), pp. 88, 84.

THE END.

[1] Dr. Manning's Letter, p. 36.

[2] Dr. Manning, p. 36.

[3] Legal force of the judgments of the Privy Council, pp. 3, 4.

[4] Ib. p. 5. My statement about Cardinal Wiseman and Dr. Manning was, "they
wrote gravely, yet both of them (it now appears) were mistaken (as I was myself
also), as to the legal effects of that judgment."

[5] Letter, p. 35

[6] See Legal force of Judgment, &c., pp. 9, 10.

[7] Dr. Manning's letter, p. 22.

[8] Letter, p. 20.

[9] Letter in App. to Mosheim, t. vi. p. 770.

[10] Catholic Miscellany, 1824, p. 234, sqq., quoted by Palmer on the Church,
ii. 232. The learned Rev. J. Berington said to me in my early youth, "There is
not much difference between us" (the Churches).

[11] The Council of Trent says: "This concupiscence, which the Apostle sometimes
calls sin,' the sacred synod declares that the Catholic Church never understood
to be so called sin, as though it were in the regenerate truly and properly sin,
but because it is from sin and inclines to sin." conc. T. p. 29. The words of
our Article, "that it hath the nature of sin," involve the statement that it is
not "truly and properly sin," as the Roman denial, that it is not properly sin,
implies that it hath something of the nature of sin about it.

[12] I endeavoured to point out, many years ago, that if people, on different
sides, dwelt on their real agreement instead of their differences in wording
their belief as to justification, this would be the result: "Justification,"
Univ. Sermon. To show this, is the object of Le Blanc, Theses Theologicæ.

[13] Prayer for the Church Militant.

[14] Letter, p. 33.

[15] See Scriptural Doctrine of Holy Baptism ("Tracts for the Times," No. 67),
pp. 294-298.

[16] Sermon on Swearing, p. 1.

[17] On Common Prayer and Sacraments, p. 1.

[18] Letter to Dr. Jelf, 1841, pp. 34, 35. The statement had been made in
substance in the letter to the Bishop of Oxford, 1839. It was repeated in my
letter to the Bishop of London, 1851, pp. 5-22.

[19] De Civ. Dei, x. 33.

[20] 2 De Doctr. Christ, iii. 6, quoted by Bp. Jewel, Answer to Hard., p. 82.

[21] P. Lombard, 1. iv. dist. 1, ib.

[22] Palmer on the Church, i. 526.

[23] In Dutens, OEuvres Mêlées, Part ii. p. 171, in Palmer, i. 211, 2.

[24] The Council of Trent was obliged to enact that "the ordinary Bishops of
each place should give diligent care and be bound to prohibit and remove all
those things which have been brought in by avarice, idolatry (Eph. v. 5), or
irreverence, which can scarcely be separated from impiety, or by superstition,
the false imitatress of true piety. And to comprise much in few words, let them
prohibit altogether, in regard to avarice, all bargaining of all sorts or pay,
or whatever is given for celebrating masses, and those importuning and illiberal
exactions rather than requests for alms, and all else of this sort, which are
not far removed from the stain of simony or certainly from filthy lucre." Sess.
xxii. de Sacrificio Missæ. The Council of Trent also desired, as we do, that,
whenever the Holy Eucharist should be celebrated, there should be those who
should communicate, in which case private masses would have ceased. "The holy
synod would wish, that at each mass the faithful present would communicate not
only by spiritual affusion, but also by sacramental reception of the Eucharist,
that so they might have fuller benefit from this most holy sacrifice." Ib. c. 6.

[25] "They [preachers] shall in the first place be careful never to teach any
thing from the pulpit to be religiously held and believed by the people, but
what is agreeable to the doctrine of the Old and New Testament, and collected
out of that very doctrine by the Catholic fathers and ancient Bishops."
Convocation of A.D. 1571 (the same Convocation which enforced subscription to
the Articles).

[26] Tracts for the Times, No. 81, p. 52.

[27] Diss. de Oblat. Euch. Irenæi Fragm. Anecdot. subj., p. 211, quoted ibid.

[28] Sess. 22, c. 4.

[29] See Homilies, end of Book i., as vindicated in Pusey's "The Real Presence
the Doctrine of the English Church."i

[30] Alvarus Pelagius de Planctu Eccl. ii. 5, quoted by Gieseler, K.G. ii. 36.

[31] Tracts for the Times, No. 90.

[32] No blame was attached either to my own vindication of the principles of
Tract 90, or to that of the Rev.

[33] Theological Defence for the Bp. of Brechin, &c., 1860. In like way I
preached in 1853, much more definitely and distinctly, the self-same doctrine of
the Real Objective Presence, which was implied in my practical sermon of 1843
(which was condemned for reasons never published), and no one objected to it

[34] Homily against Peril of Idolatry, p. 2.

[35] Projet de Réunion, iv. 3. OEuvres, T. xxv. p. 455.

[36] Defensio Declarat. Conv. Cleri Gall. 1862, L. 9. OEuvres, T. 33.

[37] The Council of Aries is intended by S. Augustine under the term "plenary
universal Council." See Pusey's "Councils of the Church," &c., p. 98.

[38] Pusey's "Councils of the Church," &c., p. 108.

[39] Bossuet, 1. c. c. 12.

[40] "Suppose we think all those Bishops who judged at Rome were not good
judges, there yet remained a plenary Council of the Universal Church, in which
the cause might have been tried with the judges themselves, so that if they had
judged amiss, their sentence might have been annulled." S. Aug. Ep. 43, ad
Glor., &c., c. 1, n. 19, in Bossuet, c. 10.

[41] Pusey's "Councils," &c., pp. 169-172.

[42] Bossuet, c. 30.

[43] Ib. c. 16-18.

[44] Bossuet, Gall. Orthod. Præv. Diss. c. 54-57. OEuvres, T. 31, pp. 123-128.
Def. Decl. Cler. Gall. L. 7, c. 21-23. T. 32, pp. 485-497.

[45] Boss. Def. Decl. L. 9, c. 37-40.

[46] Ib. c. 37.

[47] Ib. c. 41-45

[48] Ib. c. 46

[49] Ib. fin.

[50] Letter to a Jesuit, c. i. pp. 31, 32.

[51] See Note A. at the end.

[52] Cont., The Resurrection.

[53] conc. T. iii. p. 1190, ed. Col.

[54] Ib. T. iv. p. 1458.

[55] Conc. Arim. et. Seleuc. n. 6, in S. Ath. ag. Arians, T. i. p. 81, Oxf. Tr.

[56] Nic. Def. § 21. Ib. pp. 36, 37.

[57] In Theod. H. E. i. 7.

[58] Ep. 152, ad Julian. "Which the consonant patterns of our forefathers attest
to agree in all things with the doctrine of the Apostles." Ep. 131 ad Julian.

[59] Ep. 28, ad Flavian, n. 1.

[60] S. Ath. c. Arian. iii. 22, p. 431, Oxf. Tr.

[61] S. Cyril Al. on St. John xvii. 21. L. xi. c. 11, pp. 997-1000.

[62] Eph. iii. 3-5.

[63] De Trin. viii. 13.

[64] Ib. § 8.

[65] Gal. iii. 27, 28.

[66] Ad loc. Hom. 9, p. 207. Oxf. Tr.

[67] l. c. § 7.

[68] Cor. x. 17.

[69] S. John xx. 22, 23.

[70] Col. ii. 19

[71] Eph. iv. 16.

[72] Ep. 63, ad Cæcil. § 10, p. 191, Oxf. Tr.

[73] Hær. 70, n. 9, p. 821.

[74] S. Firmil. in S. Cyprian, Ep. 75, § 25, p. 284, Oxf. Tr.

[75] Præproperus, Ruf. H. E. i. 27.

[76] See Pusey's "Councils," pp. 243-252.

[77] Ib. p. 252.

[78] Adv. Lucif. c. 20, Opp. ii. 193.

[79] conc. Afr. c. 68. conc. T. ii. p. 1334, Col.

[80] See Hefele, Concilien-Gesch. ii. 899.

[81] Bulgaria. The province had originally belonged to the Patriarchate of
Constantinople. When Arian emperors expelled the orthodox bishops and put Arians
into the see, it put itself under the Patriarchate of Rome. The inhabitants were
driven out by the heathen Bulgarians, who were converted from Constantinople.
Rome claimed them, and pronounced anathemas to S. Ignatius as well, as to
Photius on this ground, as indeed the dispute was first with S. Ignatius.

[82] Disc. 6, sur l'Hist. Eccl. T. 18, § 5.

[83] conc. Const, i. can. 2, Chalc. can. 28.

[84] Lapis Offensionis, L. 2, c. 1 init., quoted by M. Trevern, Discuss.
Amicale, T. i. p. 231.

[85] Numb. xvi. 22.

[86] See the Archimandrite Macarius' History of Christianity in Russia, p. 894,
in Allies' Church of England cleared from charge of Schism, pp. 498, 499,
supplied by Rev. W. Palmer.

[87] Allies, ib. p. 500.

[88] Status Ecclesiæ in V. et N. T. Opp. T. ii. p. 155.

[89] Art. XXVI.

[90] Cod. Eccl. Afr. G. in Bruns, i. 159.

[91] Cod. Afr. c. 134, Bruns, i. 197.

[92] See their letter in Bruns, p. 199.

[93] Conc. Arim. et Seleuc. n. 5. Treatises ag. Arians, i. 80, Oxf. Tr.

[94] S. Athanas. Art. 50, T. 8, p. 110.

[95] Conc. Sac. vii. 3, 8.

[96] Conc. Sard. c. 7.

[97] See de Marca 1. c., c. 6 and 7.

[98] S. Epiph. Hær. 42, n. 2, p. 303.

[99] "This same [Praxeas] constrained the then Bishop of Rome, when on the point
of acknowledging the prophecies of Montanus, Prisca, Maximilla, and by that
recognition carrying peace to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia, to recall the
letters of peace which were already issued, and to give up his purpose of
accepting their spiritual gifts, by asserting falsehoods as to the prophets and
their churches, and maintaining the authorities of hid [Victor's] predecessors."
Tert. adv. Prax. c. i.

[100] Les Montanistes, Art. 4, T. ii. p. 425, Note 4, p. 669.

[101] Tert. c. Prax. c. i.

[102] S. Cyprian Ep. 59, ad n. 10. 22. Com. Oxf. Tr.

[103] Id. Ep. 44, ad Corn. O. T.

[104] Ep. 69 (Synod.) ad Felic., &c. n. 5.

[105] "If presbyters, deacons, or other inferior Clergy, shall, in any cause
which they may have, complain of the judgments of their own Bishops, let the
neighbouring Bishops hear them, and determine any matter between them, being
called in by them with the consent of their own Bishops. But if they think that
they should appeal from them too, let them not appeal to Courts beyond seas, but
either to the Primates of their provinces, or to a general Council [of Africa],
as has been often enacted about Bishops also-But if any one choose to appeal to
the parts beyond seas, let him be received to communion by no one within
Africa." Cod. Can. Eccl. Afr. 28. In Can. 125 it is, "let them only appeal to
African Councils or to the Primates of their provinces," without the words "as
has often been enacted about Bishops also." The clause excommunicating those who
appeal is repeated. In the Council of Carthage, A.D. 525, a canon is rehearsed
from the 11th Council, "Whoso communicates not [i. e. is excommunicate] in
Africa, if he should venture to communicate beyond seas, let him be condemned;"
as also Can. 125 from the 16th Council, and "Let no one dare to appeal to the
parts beyond seas," from the 20th. conc. iii. 780. Col.

[106] Sess. 31, Decr. i. Conc. xvii. 371. Col.

[107] In Æneas Sylv. de Gest. Bas. conc. L. I. in Brown, Fasc. rer. exp. i. p.
23.

[108] De modis uniendi ac reform. Eccl. per Conc. Opp. ii. pp. 173, 174.

[109] Gerson adds here, "The aforesaid Lord Alexander V. was altogether inclined
to this before he was Pope, when it was hi agitation that the said Council
should be held at Pisa. He not only said this, but with many arguments from
theology, philosophy, and jurisprudence, laboured at the limitation which was to
follow. When created Pope, he had no care to publish them."

[110] The whole passage is, "when there were no Papal reservations of benefices,
no inhibitions of Episcopal cases, no sales of indulgences, no commendams of
cardinals, and distributions of benefices, of priories, and monasteries."

[111] In Baluz. Miscell. vii. 555, in Gieseler K. G. § 133. Nicolas of Cusa
(A.D. 1448) still taught that "Peter did not receive any more power than the
other Apostles; that nothing was said to him which was not said to the others;
that all the Apostles were equal to Peter; that in the beginning of the Church
there was only one general episcopate, without distinction of dioceses,
throughout the world; that all bishops are of one power and dignity; that those
above others, Archiepiscopal, Patriarchal, Papal, are administrations. All
bishops have the Apostolic command to govern themselves and their flocks in
which the Holy Ghost has placed them to rule the Church, and therefore is the
synodal judgment intrusted to them, because they are chiefs and rulers of the
Church. If thou sayest that the Pope looses and binds those under the bishops, I
say the same as to others, when there is the consent of their own bishops. For
an act, null in itself, becomes valid

[112] Jacob de Paradiso: de Virtutibus Eccl. in Brown ii. 106.

[113] John Chemensis, Onus Eccl. c 19, § 16.

[114] Ib. § 14.

[115] Peter de Alliaco, A. 1415, Browne i. 407.

[116] Epist. Julian. Card, ad Eug. iv., in Browne i. 57.

[117] Letter, pp. 34, 5.

[118] See above.

[119] See above, ib.

[120] St. John xiv. 26; xvi. 13.

[121] St. Matt. x. 27. xxviii. 20.

[122] 2 Tim. ii. 2, &c.

[123] Sess. iv.

[124] Cont. 2 Epp. Pelag. end.

[125] Prosper resp. ad Obj. Gall. 8.

[126] Id. Chron. A. 418.

[127] On the Church, ii. 134.

[128] Cont. Ruff. ii. 22.

[129] De Civ. D. xxi. 17.

[130] Ib. c. 23.

[131] De Hær. c. 43.

[132] See Note B at the end.

[133] Sess. xxv. Bishop Latimer is quoted as agreeing altogether with the words
of the Council of Trent. "Take saints for inhabitants of heaven, and worshipping
them for praying to them, I never denied but that they might be worshipped, and
be our mediators, though not by way of redemption (for so Christ alone is a
whole mediator, both for them and us), yet by way of intercession."--Foxe, Acts
and Monuments.

[134] "God and the saints are not to be prayed to in the same manner, for we
pray to God that He Himself would give us good things, and deliver us from evil
things; but we beg of the saints that they would be our advocates, and obtain
from God what we stand in need of."--Cat. of C. of Trent, quoted by Milner, End
of Contr. Lett, xxxiii.

[135] Milner, ib.

[136] Dr. Pusey's Letter to Dr. Jelf, pp. 187-216, and Sermon, Rule of Faith,
pp. 65-61.

[137] Liguori, Glories of Mary, v. 1, quoted Rule of Faith, p. 57.

[138] Ib.

[139] Suarez, T. ii. in 3 P. Disp. 23, § 3.

[140] Liguori, ib.

[141] See the Proofs in Rule of Faith, p. 55.

[142] Bernardine Sen. Serm. 61, Tr. i., Art. 8, quoted by Lig.

[143] Contensonius, Theol. Mentis et Cordis, T. ii. L. x. D. iv. c. 1, in Lig.

[144] See in Rule of Faith, p. 58.

[145] Bernardine Sen. Serm. 61, c. 8.

[146] Ric. a S. Laurent, de Laud. Virg. L. 3, p. 1, and others in Lig.

[147] Eadmer de Excell. Virg. cxi., quoted as St. Anselm, in Lig. St. Antonin.
ib.

[148] Ascribed to St. Chrys. if not to St. Ignat., but spurious, in Lig.

[149] "All things are subject to the command of the Virgin, even God Himself."
Bern. Sen. Serm. 61, Art. i. c. 6. Ussher, p. 417. "The Blessed Virgin is
superior to God, and God Himself is subject unto her, in respect of the Manhood
which He assumed from her." Bern, de Bust. Marial. p. 9, Serm. 2, ib. "However
she be subject unto God, inasmuch as she is a creature, yet she is said to be
superior and preferred before Him, inasmuch as she is His mother." Ib. p. 2, s.
2, ib. "You have over God the authority of a mother, and hence you obtain pardon
for the most obdurate sinners." Gl. of M. in Letter, p. 209.

[150] Glories of M. p. 85, quoted Letter, p. 208. See also Treatise on the
Scapular, c. 7, p. 43. Gl. of M. p. 130. On "participated omnipotency," ib. 207.

[151] As "in the vision which Burn. de Bust, reciteth as shown to St. Francis
touching the two ladders, that reached from earth to heaven, the one red, upon
which Christ leaned, from which many fell backward and could not ascend; the
other white, upon which the holy Virgin leaned; the help whereof such as used,
were by her received with a cheerful countenance, and so with facility ascended
into heaven." Marial. p. 9, Serm. 2, Assim. 2; also (as shown to Fr. Lion) Spec.
vit. Franc, et soc. p. 2, c. 45, Spec. exempl. dist. 7, exempl. 41, in Ussher,
p. 429, repeated in Glor. of M. p. 180.

[152] Jac. de Valent. in Expos. Magnificat. Ussher.

[153] Gabr. Biel in Can. Miss. Lect. 80. Bernardin. de Bust. Marial. p. 3, s. 3,
de excell. 4, in Ussher.

[154] Bern. de B. ib. Exc. 5, and p. 5, Serm. 7, fin. Ussher.

[155] "I shall no longer fear your Son justly irritated, since one word from you
[Mary] will appease Him." Gl. of M. p. 74. Letter on Tract 90, p. 211. "If my
Saviour drive me off because of my sins, I will go and cast myself at the feet
of His mother; thence I will not rise till she has obtained my pardon. For she
does not know what it is to be insensible to the voice of misery, and her pity
will mitigate the anger of her Son." Gl. of M. p. 89. Ib.i

[156] Innocent III. in Glories of Mary, p. 69; Letter, ib.

[157] Blosius in Glories of Mary, p. 93; quoted, ib.

[158] Eadmer, de Exc. B. V., ib. p. 212.

[159] M. Olier, Catéchisme Chrétien, quoted Rule of Faith, p. 60.

[160] A friend of mine, in like way, was asked to pray to the Blessed Virgin in
a form framed on the beginning of the Litany: "Mary, daughter of the Father,
give me light; Mary, Mother of the Son,--Mary, Spouse of the Holy Ghost,"--the
especial prayers I forget; but they were exactly the same prayers which we
should have addressed to the Holy Trinity. "These English are but half
converts!" was the exclamation of an Italian priest by a devout deathbed, when
the dying person commended herself to "Jesus," instead of to "Jesus and Mary."

[161] On Prayer, p. 277.

[162] Answer to Card. Perron's Reply, end, pp. 58. 62 [pp. 76. 80, ed. Ang.
Cath. Lib.]. say to the Blessed Virgin, Sancta Maria!'

[163] "Eximium adorationis genus." Bellarm. Præf. in Controv. Eccl. Triumph,
quoted by Ussher, p. 402.

[164] Azor. Inst. Mor. T. i. L. i.x. c. 10, quoted ib.

[165] The one exception is a relation given by S. Gregory as to S. Justina, out
of some spurious Acts belonging to the latter half of the fourth (his own)
century. The Acts, from which he takes his account, agree in substance with
those which S. Prudentius also had (Peristeph. 13), and which the Empress
Eudoxia versified (Phot. Cod. 184, p. 216, Hoesch.). All alike, on the ground of
those Acts, confound S. Cyprian with an Eastern martyr, whom the Acts make a
magician before he was converted. Besides historical inaccuracies, the Acts have
plainly fabulous stories about magic. (See Baluz. Præf. ad S. Cypr. xxxiii.). As
extant, however, they have not the history related by S. Gregory, that, at the
close of long prayers to God Justina "besought the Virgin Mary to succour a
virgin in peril from the assaults of Satan." (Orat. 24, §11.) S. Gregory relates
the fact as he found it in his Acts, without comment, not remarking on the Acts
of a martyr. The Acts are most full, in Latin, in Martene, Anecd. iii. pp. 1621,
sqq.; the Conf. S. Cypriani exists in Greek, App. to S. Cypr. p. ccxcv., Ben. In
no instance, among the genuine Acts of Martyrs, edited by Ruinart, is any martyr
related to have asked for help amidst those superhuman sufferings, or otherwise,
except from God generally, or from our Lord.

[166] Paradise for the Christian Soul, Advertisement.

[167] Or say, "If I walk through the midst of the shadow of death, I will fear
no evil, for she is with me. If war arise against me, in this will I be
confident. If my father and mother forsake me, the Mother of my Lord shall take
me up."

[168] "Christ is not our Advocate only, but a Judge; and since the Just is
scarcely secure, how shall a sinner go to Him, as an Advocate? Therefore God has
provided us of an advocatress, who is gentle and sweet, in whom nothing that is
sharp is to be found."--Antonin. quoted by Taylor, Dissuasive, 1. ii. 8.

[169] "For after that our Lord arose from the dead, and they were endued with
the power of the Holy Spirit coming upon them from on high, they were fully
filled as to all things, and had perfect knowledge.' It is unlawful to say that
they preached before they had perfect knowledge.' S. Iren. iii. 1. 1. According
to these' [the heretics], Peter was imperfect; imperfect also the other
Apostles. And were they to live again, they must needs become the disciples of
these, that they too may become perfect. But this were absurd.'" Ib. 12. 7. See
also in the same book, 11 ult.

[170] Id. iii. 3. 5.

[171] Tert. de Præscr. Hær. c. 22.

[172] Ep. Encycl. Pii IX. A.D. 1849.

[173] Faber, Preface to transl. of De Montfort on the true devotion to the
Blessed Virgin, pp. xi. xii., vi. vii.

[174] In his controversial Lectures.

[175] Bishop Nicholson, Coadjutor of Corfu, says: "I persuaded many Bishops of
Italy, Germany, England, Ireland, to ask for the word Immaculate' to be added to
the Mass of the Conception, and Queen conceived without original stain,' in the
Litany of Loretto, and to supplicate the Vicar of Jesus Christ to declare the
Immaculate Conception ex cathedra." Pareri dell' Episcopato Cattolico sulla
definizione dogmatico dell' immacolato concepimento della B. V. Maria, i. 403.
The Roman Catholic Bishops of Cashel, Killaloe, Cork, Elphin imply that the
people had not been taught the doctrine. The R. C. Archbishop of Cashel said,
that "they had not explicit faith, but that they had implicit," since they so
venerated the Blessed Virgin, that they would believe any thing to her honour
(Ib. i. 487); the R. C. Bishop of Killaloe, that the clergy had been silent
about it, on account of various Bulls (Ib. i. 500); of Cork, that the laity were
not versed in theological questions (Ib. ii. 85); of Elphin, that he did not ask
people, as they did not understand the question (Ib. ii. 204). The R. C. Bishop
of Meath said, that both "priests and people believed it" (Ib. iii. 211), and
the Bishop of Clonfert, that they would reject the contrary, which, however, he
as well as others put in the form, that she had been "a child of wrath" (Ib.
iii. 214).

[176] Pref. to De Montf. p. ix. x.

[177] Faber's Italics.

[178] Faber's Italics.

[179] 1 Pet. iv. 12; i. 7.

[180] Heb. vii. 25.

[181] S. Matt. xi. 28.

[182] S. John xvi. 23; xiv. 13, 14.

[183] Pareri, iii. 149.

[184] Ib. iii. 344.

[185] Ib. i. 159. "Ut nullis terminis sit definita."

[186] e. g. The Bishop of Lerida, "in hoc Mariano regno," Par. i, 168. In like
way the Bishop of Guadalaxara speaks of Mexico as "Marian" (iii. 76), and so
others.

[187] Ep. Encycl. A.D. 1849.

[188] 88 Italian Bishops wrote, 54 French, 11 only from Spain and Portugal,
including Spanish and Portuguese America; 5 English, including Australia; 1
Irish; 9 European Missionary Bishops in China, the East Indies, &c.; 1 from
Senegal, 1 of Corfu. 20 French Bishops, who wrote subsequently, did not write
then; 13 French, and 25 Italian (chiefly Neapolitan), who wrote then, sent no
answer to the Encyclical. Gregory XVI. assigned the silence of Bishops from
other nations as a ground for not proceeding then. The Bishop de la Rochelle
gives an extract from his letter to himself. "He (Gregory XVI.) added, that
except the Bishops of France, and some of Venetia, Lombardy, and Spain, the
Bishops of other nations had hitherto kept silence; Germany, England, and
Ireland had been silent; that there seemed to him ground to fear, lest the
judgment asked for, if then solemnly promulged, would render the Apostolic See
odious to certain nations; that complaining and almost threatening sounds,
emanating from different countries, had been heard at the Canonization of some
whom Pius VII. had placed among the saints." Par. i. 13.

[189] This seems to be almost a proverbial saying. It occurs in the Bishop of
Bayeux, i. 289. Lipari, i. 347. Iaca, i. 480, &c.

[190] "She shall bruise His head," for, "He shall bruise." Ipsa, for ipse, an
error which came into the Latin about the time of S. Augustine. See De Rossi
Varr. Lect. T. ii. App. pp. 210, 211. The frequent allusions to this
"protevangelium," in the letters of the Bishops and in controversy, as though it
ascribed to the Blessed Virgin directly and personally, what God promised as to
the Person of our Lord, shows how deeply this mistake of the Vulgate has worked
into the Marian system.

[191] "The destroyer of heresies throughout the whole world" is a received title
of the B. V. in the Roman Church, applying to her present personal power, what
was originally said of the Incarnation, that it, rightly believed, is the
destruction of all heresies.

[192] Catharinus.

[193] The Bishop of Massa di Carrara doubtless expressed the mind of many, when
he said, "In a matter of such moment, to be defined by the supreme and
infallible judgment of the Holy See, I dare not open the sentiment of my mind"
(i. 319). The same feeling is apparent in many other responses.

[194] There were answers from 178 Bishops of Italy, and the adjacent islands;
101 from Spain and Portugal, with Spanish and Portuguese America. The whole
number was about 490.

[195] iii. 144. See B. n. 36. The Pareri, &c., being now a very scarce book,
extracts from this and most of the following letters are given in Note B., at
the end.

[196] iii. 34. B. n. 37.

[197] iii. 44-46. B. n. 38.

[198] ii. 153. B. n. 38

[199] ii. 218. B. n. 40.

[200] ii. 366. B. n. 41.

[201] ii. 290. B. n. 42.

[202] ii. 158. B. n. 43.

[203] The Bishops of Bergamo, Como, Crema, Lodi, Mantua, with the Vicars General
of the chapters of Cremona, Pavia, and Brescia, i. 222, 223

[204] ii. 99. B. n. 44.

[205] i. 415. B. n. 45.

[206] i. 481. B. n. 46.

[207] ix. App. 17. B. n. 47.

[208] iii. 374.

[209] Thom. Valentin, conc. 2 de Nativ. B. M. V.

[210] iii. 376-379.

[211] ii. 143. B. n. 50.

[212] ii. 148.

[213] iii. 309.

[214] Viz. 22. France has 14 Archbishops, 66 Bishops; in all, 80 (Moroni, T. 27,
p. 141).

[215] ii. 26-46; iii. 310, 311, 338. B. n. 1.

[216] i. 357-359. B. n. 2.

[217] i. 362, 363. B. n. 3

[218] i. 100, 101. B. n. 4.

[219] i. 175, 176. B. n. 5.

[220] i. 445, 446. B. n. 6.

[221] ii. 362, 363. B. n. 7.

[222] iii. 333. B. n. 8.

[223] i. 121. B. n. 9.

[224] iii. 290. B. n. 10.

[225] i. 135. B. n. 11.

[226] i. 321. B. n. 12.

[227] 211, 212. B. n. 13.

[228] i. 498. B. n. 14.

[229] ii. 163. B. n. 15.

[230] i. 361.

[231] ii. 11.

[232] i. 258, 259. B. n. 16.

[233] ii. 464, 465.

[234] This and the following numbers are taken from McCulloch's Geography, upon
whose numbers (he being "a member of the Institute") I concluded that I might
rely.

[235] Sebenico, Zara, Spalatro.

[236] Moroni, T. xix. pp. 75, 75.

[237] Colocsa and Bayia, Fünfkirchen, Sabaria, Scepusio.

[238] iii. 232, 233. B. n. 24, 25.

[239] ii. 404. B. n. 25b.

[240] i. 177-179. B. n. 21.

[241] i. 327. B. n. 22.

[242] i. 436. B. n. 23.

[243] ii. 467. B. n. 26.

[244] vii. cxxxviii. cxxxix. B. n. 28.

[245] iii. 184. B. n. 29.

[246] i. 278-280. B. n. 27.

[247] vii clvii. B. n. 30.

[248] iii. 346, 347. B. n. 31.

[249] ii. 439. B. n. 32.

[250] iii. 307, 308. B. n. 33.

[251] ii. 447. B. n. 34.

[252] ii. 417. B. n. 19.

[253] ii. 59. B. n. 20.

[254] iii. 303. B. n. 18.

[255] i. 411, 412. B. n. 17.

[256] ii. 370.

[257] i. 266.

[258] iii. 351. B. n. 48.

[259] iii. 354. B. n. 49.

[260] ii. 385.

[261] ii. 398.

[262] iii. 172.

[263] Moroni, T. 95, p. 76.

[264] iii. 23.

[265] iii. 321.

[266] ii. 18.

[267] ii. 25.

[268] i. 55, 56.

[269] i. 293. In like way the Archbishop of Orviedo: "In this most turbulent
tempest, wherewith the Church of Christ is tossed everywhere, the eyes of all
are turned to Mary, who slew all heresies in all the world, as to a polar star;
and this is perhaps the council of Divine Providence, that she should then at
length calm and disperse the storm, when she shall be adorned with this new
honour by the oracle of the Church itself."--ii. 461.

[270] Perhaps a misprint, "magna" for "magnas." "She herself will yield thee
great thanks," &c.

[271] i. 301.

[272] Ib. 323.

[273] iii. 202.

[274] i. 281, 282. "I hold for certain, that the Most Holy Mother of God,
adorned at length with his honour on earth, will rescue the Church of her Son
safe out of such calamities and perils."--Tivoli, i. 237.

[275] i. 13.

[276] i. 115, 116. So the Bishop of Squillace, i. 113.

[277] i. 169.

[278] As the Bishop of Casale, iii. 62; Rottenburg, i. 276; Warmia, i. 280;
Durango, iii. 156; Jesus, Massa et Popul. i. 273.

[279] Coadj. Bishop of Montreal, ii. 268. Nevers, iii. 245.

[280] Archb. of Cuba, i. 142.

[281] ii. 486, 488.

[282] Adm. of Nankin, iii. 23.

[283] iii. 37, 38, 39. The Archbishop of Cuba expected as the result that "all
would be one fold and One Shepherd," i. 142. The Bishop of Isernia, "that there
would be peace to the whole Church," i. 162. The Bishop of Valladolid,
"extirpation of heresies, peace of the Church, increase of true faith and
piety," i. 195. The Bishop of Gubbio, "conversion of sinners and unbelievers,"
i. 147, 148. "Those many lost benefits will return to the human race, and to the
Church tranquillity, peace, security, splendour,'' Coadj. of Corfu, i. 409.
"Faith, charity, religion," S. Fé di Bogota, ii. 432. "She, with her virgin and
immaculate foot, will bruise the head of the Infernal Serpent, will bring to
nought the snares of the Prince of darkness, scattered wide, in these our times,
by the most impious sects, and by her potent virtue will restore peace to the
Church, and its own rights, power, liberty, glory to the Holy Apostolic See, and
thee, the head of the whole Church and the foundation, she will preserve," Abb.
Commendat. of S. Vincent and Anastasius, i. 173. "Innumerable riches of grace
will be diffused to the whole Christian people, and our sorrow will be turned
into joy," Ugento, i. 228. The Bishop of Aire advocated it because "never was
the bruising of the serpent's head more needed," i. 272.

[284] i. 491.

[285] Said of Jesus, Isa. xi. 4, 1 Thess. ii. 8.

[286] i. 298.

[287] iii. 370.

[288] See Bossuet, Def. Cler. Gall. vii. 15-17, translated too by Allies,
"Church of England cleared from Schism," pp. 282-287.

[289] P. 3, q. 84, art. 1.

[290] Ib. art. 2.

[291] See Bossuet, Def. Cler. Gall. vii. 22, sqq.

[292] ix. 201.

[293] Ib. i. 325. "She deserved the name and glory of Co -redeemer," Archbishop
of Trani, ib, i. 10.

[294] "Quem simul cum Eo Ipsa corredemit," ib. i. 218.

[295] ix. 160.

[296] ix. 7.

[297] Ib. i. 186.

[298] Pro Immac. B. V. Concept., c. 19, n. 7.

[299] Id. ib. c. 21, n. 2.

[300] Ib. n. 3-7.

[301] De Salazar on Prov. viii. 19, pp. 621-629.

[302] S. Bernardin. de Bust. Marial. P. IX. Serm. ii. in Ussher, 1. c., c. ix.

[303] Rom. v. 19.

[304] Phil. ii. 8.

[305] S. Luke ii. 61.

[306] Salazar in Prov. viii. 30, p. 696, and Ind. v. Maria.

[307] Ib. p. 649.

[308] Ib. p. 544. The terms are known terms, "patrizo" and "matrizo."

[309] "As I have often inculcated, Christ so wrought our redemption, as to call
in Mary, as an aid in this work. Wherefore as the birth, nature itself guiding,
derives strength from the man, but, from the woman, form and beauty; so also our
redemption (which was borne, as it were, by Mary and Christ) derives from Christ
sufficiency, strength, and consistency, but from Mary, beauty and loveliness.
For as therefrom, that Christ the Lord worked our redemption, we infer rightly,
that nothing of sufficiency or might should be wanting to it; so therefrom, that
the Virgin cooperated to the same, we rightly reduce, that nothing of form or
beauty could be missed in it. For in some way the grace and beauty of the
redemption would fade, if the aforesaid coöperation of the Virgin were lacking."
Salaz. pro Immac. Virg. Conc., § 14, n. 171.

[310] De Montf. p. 143.

[311] Oswald, Mariologie, 171. De Montfort speaks of her resurrection. True
devotion, &c., p. 1.

[312] Oswald, p. 174.

[313] Ib. p. 198.

[314] Salazar in Prov. ix. 4, 5, p. 769.

[315] Oswald, 174-186. Oswald speaks of her office to us in Baptism, ib.
187,--"Through it, the woman has a right to that special blessing, deposited for
her in the Church through the merits of Mary."

[316] Ib. 200.

[317] De Montfort, pp. 74 and 126.

[318] Ib. p. 11.

[319] Ib. p. 21.

[320] Ib. p. 19.

[321] Ib. p. 20.

[322] Ib. p. 186.

[323] Ib. p. 187

[324] Ib. p. 188.

[325] Ib. 49, 50.

[326] Salazar, 1. c. p. 213.

[327] Eph. i. 10.

[328] Salazar pro Imm. Deip. V. Concept, c. 3, p. 28.

[329] Ib. in Prov. xxx. n. 200.

[330] Archbishop of Trani, Par. i. 10. The title is a mere mistake, drawn from a
Latin translation of a homily attributed to some Hesychius, Presbyter of
Jerusalem, in which he contrasted Mary with Noah's ark. "It was an ark of living
things, she of life; it, of perishable animals, she, of imperishable Life; it
bare Noah, she bare the Maker of Noah; it had two or three stories, she the
whole fulness of the Trinity; inasmuch as the Spirit too came upon her, and the
Father overshadowed her, and the Son dwelt in her, borne in the womb." Bibl.
Patr., Paris 1624, T. ii. p. 421. Whereas the writer (whoever he was) spoke of
the whole Holy Trinity as concerned in the Incarnation, a celebrated Jesuit
preacher, first-court-preacher of Philip III., attributed the saying, as altered
into "Mary is the Complement of the whole Trinity," to the celebrated Hesychius
of Jerusalem. He explained it to mean that she "added the last complement to the
Holy Trinity, in that, through the Incarnation of our Lord in her, the Virgin
Mother of God filled up the capacity which the Trinity had of a natural
paternity and a natural filiation, and a bond of both in time, in addition to
the eternal relations of natural Paternity and natural Filiation, and the
Indissoluble Bond of both." Other solutions were: 1) That the attributes and
perfections of the Trinity shone forth most in her, and showed forth their
virtue and efficacy most in her. (Salazar rejects this, because Hesychius is
said to have affirmed, that the Virgin was "the complement not of the attributes
of God, but of the very Trinity itself.") 2) "That the Father imparts His
infinite Essence to the Son, and the Son, with the Father, communicates the same
to the Holy Ghost; but that there is no fourth person to whom the Holy Ghost can
pour Himself forth without measure. Mary then gave a complement to the Trinity,
in that the Holy Ghost could lighten that infinite desire of communicating
Himself by the wonderful affluence of His gifts to Mary." Salazar in Prov. viii.
23, n. 800-306.

[331] It was put forward by many of the Bishops in their answer to the
Encyclical.

[332] De Montfort, pp. 30, 31.

[333] Letter to Dr. Jelf, p. 209. It was said on the authority of one who had
been staying at Rome.

[334] Oswald, Dogmat. Mariologie, p. 177.

[335] Ib. p. 179.

[336] Ib. pp. 182, 183.

[337] Corn. à Lap. on Ecclus. xxiv. 29.

[338] Faber, "The Precious Blood," pp. 29, 30. Salazar mentions a meditation of
S. Ignatius, which he thought to have been given him by God, but which rested on
human reasoning on physics, viz., that, on Aristotle's maxim, that "the son is a
great part of his father and mother," "in the Eucharist he received the flesh
and blood, not only of Christ, but also a great, yea, chief, part of Mary. For
if the flesh and blood of the son and the mother be one, he who receiveth the
flesh and blood of the son, must needs also receive the flesh of the mother. And
if the son is a part of his parents, whoso eateth the son, eateth also a part of
his mother. Hence, he said, that all they who are worthily refreshed with the
Body and Blood of Christ, become one flesh not only with the Lord Christ, but
pass into one flesh with the Virgin." Salazar in Prov. ix. 4, 5, n. 144, 145.

[339] De Canoniz. Sanct. ii. 32. 11, quoted by A. Butler, Oct. 8, S. Brigit,
from Araus., Decis. Mor., Tract. 3, qu. 23, § 2. Gerson, Opp., T. i., col. 24,
says, that two contradictories may, in different respects, be piously believed:
quoted by Bened. XIV. ib. "For although no one ought to believe or to propose to
be believed, what he knew to be certainly false, yet so long as it was not
certainly known to be false, the pious belief was independent of its truth or
falsehood." Fleury, H. E. 70, n. 161, quotes Papebrock (app. ad Vit. S. Mariæ de
Pazzi), as showing by instances that visions are no dogmatic authority. Yet they
themselves claim this most energetically as an authority beyond all other. In
the Revelations of S. Brigit, the Blessed Virgin is supposed to have said, "If
ye believe not Scripture, the Church, the Fathers, at least believe ye me, who
have often revealed, that all sin of Adam was severed from me, &c." Revel. S.
Brig. c. 12. 45. 49. T. ii. quoted by Bishop of Marsi, Par. ii. 311.

[340] Palmer, Diss. on the Orthodox Comm., pp. 248, 249.

[341] Alv. Pelagius (Bishop), in the fourteenth century, says, "The Roman Church
does not celebrate, though it tolerates, the Feast of the Conception. The feast
ought to be referred to the sanetification of the Virgin, not to her Conception;
and so says the prayer which is said in this feast at Rome in the Church of S.
Maria Major, Deus, qui sanctificationem Virginis,' &c., as I saw and heard when
I preached on that sanctification, on that feast of the sanctification which is
kept in December fifteen days before the Feast of the Nativity.' "De Planctu
Eccl. i. 51. Turrecremata attests that in the office then used in Germany on the
Feast of S. Elizabeth there were these words, "The Blessed Virgin Mary, although
full of grace, was yet born with the fomes [peccati], which, however, the virtue
of the Highest extinguished at the very time of the Conception of Christ."
Preuss, p. 1017. Gregory XV., A.D. 1622, forbade the use of any other word than
"Conception "in any office, public or private (i. e. forbade the word
sanctification). Bullar. T. v. 65, § 4, pp. 45, 46. He expunged the word
"sanctification" from the liturgies. Archbishop of Albano, Pareri, &c., ii. 237.
Yet some Bishops argued that the Immaculate Conception was matter of faith, on
the ground that the festival had always been celebrated at Rome.

[342] S. Anselm, Cur Deus homo, ii. 16 A,--"The Virgin herself, whence He was
assumed, was conceived in iniquity, and in sin did her mother conceive her, and
with original sin was she born, because she too sinned in Adam, in whom all
sinned." S. Peter Damian, Opusc. vi. 19,--"From that very flesh of the Virgin,
which was conceived of sin, the Flesh came forth without sin, which also
abolished the sins of the flesh." So in the ninth century Paschasius Radbertus,
de Perp. Virg. S. Mariæ,--"But the Blessed Mary, although she was born and
procreated of the flesh of sin, and herself was flesh of sin, was she not then,
from the forecoming grace of the Holy Ghost, called by the angel blessed above
all women? The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest
shall overshadow thee.' Else if she was not sanctified and cleansed by the same
spirit, how was not her flesh, flesh of sin? "In like way P. Lombard, Hugh and
Richard à S. Victore, Alexander of Ales, S. Thomas Aquinas, S. Bonaventura,
Albertus Magnus, &c., and, earlier, the two S. Fulgentius. Rusp. de Inc. et
Grat. c. 6: "The flesh of Mary, because she was conceived in iniquity after the
manner of men, was flesh of sin. If it is not called untruthfully flesh of sin,
the flesh hath in itself sin." S. Fulg. Ferr., "The flesh of Christ was like and
unlike to the flesh of Mary; like, because He was born of it; unlike, because He
did not contract thence the contagion of a vitiated origin." From Pet. de Inc.
xiv. 2. Add Bede Hom. sup. Missus, Rup. in Cant. c. 1, i. p. 986. Melchior Canus
quotes also S. Erhard, or Eberhard, S. Antoniua of Padua, S. Bernardino, S.
Vincent Ferr., S. Antoninus, &c.

[343] See above, pp. 124-131, and Note B at the end.

[344] Oswald, Mariologie, p. 216.

[345] De Montf. p. 171.

[346] Ib. p. 58. Oswald says, "Ascending, the ladder to heaven leads first to
the Mother; from the Mother to the Son; from the Son to the Father. We might,
indeed, passing over the lowest Court, turn direct to the Son; but we can also
spring over the middle step and go direct to the Godhead." Yet, so we should
directly contradict our Lord, "No one cometh to the Father but by Me." It is not
God, but man, who says, "no man cometh unto Jesus but by Mary." Oswald proceeds,
"The natural order is that which I have named. I believe that this way of
looking at it, will occasion milder judgment as to a certain equalizing, nay,
apparent preference of the devotion to Mary to that to Christ. As long as it is
genuine, it can only have the meaning, that Mary, in this valley of tears, is
nearer to us, and so is approached most gladly."--p. 216. He himself asserts
that "Mary is always--more dimly or more clearly, this does not matter-- thought
of in connexion with her Son."

[347] De Montf. p. 171.

[348] Corn. à Lap. on Cant. v. 11, p. 247.

[349] "Franc. Suarez thinks this very probable (3 p. q. 37, disp. 22, S. 3, sub
fin.), and from him Mendoza (in Viridario, L. 2, Probl. 4), though G. Vazquez
thinks the contrary, de Adorat., disp. 8, c. 2." Ibid.

[350] "2. 2. q. 103, art. 4, ad 2."

[351] De Montf. p. 68.

[352] Ib. p. 65.

[353] Oswald, Mariologie, p. 216. The "Oro pro nobis," as said in the litanies
to the saints; "Miserere nobis," as said in the litanies to the Holy Trinity.

[354] Pétau de Inc. xii. 8, fin. speaks against it.

[355] "Since we have already allowed the Roman Clergy to recite the special
Canonical Hours, quite recently composed and printed, on the Conception of the
most Blessed Virgin, in place of those contained in the common Breviary,
therefore by these letters we give you, venerable brothers, the faculty, that,
if it seem good, all the Clergy of your diocese should be free to render the
same canonical hours on the Conception of the most holy Virgin, which the Roman
Clergy now use, without needing to implore leave from us or from our
Congregation of sacred rites."--Ep. Encycl. Pii IX. A.D. 1849.

[356] Pp. 62-64.

[357] P. 41.

[358] "In actuali plurimorum Episcoporum congregatione præsentem."

[359] Pareri dell' Episc. Cattolico, i. 178, 179.

[360] The Archbishop of Breslau, who, in the most solemn and earnest manner,
opposed the decree, spoke of "a part of the clergy, imbued with neologism, in
the Rhine provinces, in Baden, and in Bohemia."--Pareri, &c., ii. 467. The
Bishop of Clermont said, "Although the days are evil, and the number of those
who, tainted with unbelief or ignorance, care little as to things pertaining to
salvation but too increased, &c."-- Ib., ii. 471.

[361] Sess. xxv.

[362] Milner, End of Contr., Letter 43, n. 2.

[363] Sermon on Pride, Works, iii. 798, quoted in Tract 90, p. 27.

[364] Aquinas held this; and that the difference was, that "the damned, as being
worse in merits, are to be reckoned worse in place." See in my Letter to Dr.
Jelf, p. 85.

[365] Adv. Hær. v. 32. 1.

[366] Wisdom iv. 13.

[367] Burial Service.

[368] Longer Catechism, P. i. p. 98, 99, Blackmore's Transl.

[369] Klee, Dogmatik, ii. 429, 430.

[370] Instructio pro Sacerd., Serm. 2, in v. d. Hardt, Hist. Ref.

[371] Id. Serm. 3, ib.

[372] Supplication of Souls. Works, p. 316. See Letter to Dr. Jelf, p. 87.

[373] The language is that of the late F. Faber.

[374] The case of this class of souls is the stock argument among those who are
denying Hell, "those who die in ignorance, like the thousands of the London
poor." Who ever said or suggested that they would necessarily be lost? Mr.
Wilson, in his Defence (p. 147), maintained that the Roman doctrine of Purgatory
made the belief in Hell more reasonable in the Roman, than in the English
Church; as though the English Church held that any whom the Roman Church assigns
to Purgatory would be cast into Hell!

[375] 1 Tim. ii. 1-4.

[376] Rosignoli, Opere, i. 710, as quoted in Faber, "All for Jesus;"
"Purgatory," pp. 354-356.

[377] Commination Service.

[378] S. Cyprian, Ep. 57, ad Corn. p. 136, Oxf. Tr.

[379] S. Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 18.

[380] 2 Cor. ii. 10.

[381] Can. 3. So Conc. Ancyr. c. 2. 7. 16. Nic. i. c. 12. Arelat. ii. c. 10.
Canons of S. Basil, Ep. ad Amphiloch. c. 2. 7. 53. 74. 84. S. Greg. Nyss., Ep.
Canon, ad Letoium, can. 8. 11. conc. Garth, can. 75, 76. Aur. iv. c. 8. 27.
Wormat. (A. 868), c. 25. Tribur. (A. 890), c. 52. These are the chief instances
given by Amort, Hist. Indulg. P. ii. c. iv. § 31-52.

[382] As in the Poenitentials of Bede, Theodore, Burchard, the Roman

[383] Ib. § 57.

[384] Alb. M. in iv. dist. 20, art. 21, Aq. iv. dist. 24, q. 3. art. 2.

[385] Because S. Gregory I. instituted certain stations, it was inferred, by
mistake, that he annexed indulgences to the visiting of the stations, which no
old writer mentions. See Pagi in Leo IV. 1, n. 4.

[386] The indulgences ascribed to Leo III. A.D. 803, Sergius, A.D. 847. See
Mabillon, Præf. ad Sæc. 5 Bened. n. 107, Papebroch. Conat. Chron.-Hist, Diss.
17, quoted and extracted, in part, in Amort, Hist. Indulg. P. i. n. xlv., xlvi.,
pp. 43-63.

[387] Jo. Vitoduranus, Chron. ad A. 1265, in Gieseler, ii. 2, § 80, n. c.

[388] Berthold, Deutsche Pred., p. 384, ed. Kl.

[389] Menot, Serm. Quadr. f. 147 b, in Gies. K. G. Par. 3, § 147, n. ee.

[390] Hist. Indulg. P. ii. S. v. § 2, p. 289.

[391] Theol. Eclect. T. iii. p. 189. The divine who supplied me with this last
quotation, adds, "I believe this to be the common doctrine now. Thus Scavini
says, that they are given by way of suffrage or of simple payment, in so far as
God is prayed to vouchsafe to accept them. But in what measure God accepts them,
we know not.'"

[392] Sess. xxv. continuat.

[393] Sess. 25. Tract 91, p. 36.

[394] End of Controv., Let. xxxiv.

[395] Laud, Speech at the Star-Chamber, 1637, p. 47.i

[396] Dr. Arnold's Life, ii. 402.

[397] De Incarn. xv. 13. 1.

[398] M. Beauvoir's Letter to Wake, Dec. 11, 1717. No. 2 in Maclaine, Trans, of
Mosh. vi. 98.

[399] Du Pin's "Rélation de ce qui s'est passé entre M. Du Pin et M.
l'Archevêque de Cantorbery, au sujet des lettres qu'ils se sont mutuellement
écrites," in Wake's MS. letters, Christ Church Lib., T. 25, n. 139.

[400] Letter of M. Beauvoir, Feb. 8, 1719, Ib. n. 190 (it stands as 110). For
these notices I am indebted to the Rev. E. Foulkes.

[401] Letter of M. Beauvoir (no date), and in another letter of April 5,1718, 0.
S., Wake, Ep. T. 28. The Oration itself is in T. 25, n. 67, and M. Girardin's
letter, with which he sent it to Wake, Ib. n. 66, April 30, 1718.

[402] Ib. n. 99.

[403] Ib. n. 92, dated VI. Kal. Sept.

[404] Maclaine, App. to Mosheim, vi. p. 75.

[405] Letter of M. Beauvoir to Archbishop Wake, Sept. 17, 1718, T. 29, n. 5.

[406] Du Pin's Rélation, 1. c.

[407] Beauvoir to Wake, T. 28, July 16, 1718, O. S.

[408] Trans. of Mosheim Eccl. Hist., T. vi., pp. 75-80.

[409] Art. I.--V., VII.--IX., XII, XV.--XVIII., XXIIL, XXIV., XXVI., XXV1L,
XXX., XXXII--XXXIV., XXXVIII, XXXIX.

[410] The original words are: "Hoc lubenter admittemus, modo non excludatur
traditio, quae articulos fidei novos non exhibet, sed confirmat et explicat ea,
quse in Sacris Literis habentur, ac adversus aliter sapientes munit eos novis
cautionibus, ita ut non nova dicantur, sed antiqua nove." Macl.

[411] See the passages collected in Tract 90. The Jews agreed in speaking of the
Wisdom of Sirach as Scripture. See Dr. Pusey's "Daniel the Prophet," p. 303.

[412] See, at length, in Bishop Cosins on the Canon (with notes in Ang. Cath.
Lib.).

[413] The original words are: "Fide sola in Christum nos justificari, quod
Articulo XImo exponitur, non inficiamur: sed fide, charitate, et adjunctis bonis
operibus, quæ omnino necessaria sunt ad salutem, ut articulo sequenti
cognoscitur." Ib.

[414] "De Articulo XIIImo nulla lis erit, cum multi theologi in eadem versentur
sententia. Durius videtur id dici, eas omnes actiones quæ ex gratiâ Christi non
fiunt, esse peccata. Nolim tamen de hac re disceptari, nisi inter theologos."

[415] S. Matt. xix. 11, 12.

[416] De Sacr. Euch. Bibl. Patr. T. xxvi. p. 794, G. H.

[417] Ib., init.

[418] Sess. xiv. de Extrem. Unct. c. 3. In the Latin Church, the bodily healing
is mentioned in a homily ascribed to Cæsarius, "How much more right and
healthful were it, to haste to the Church, receive the Body and Blood of Christ,
faithfully anoint themselves and theirs with the blessed oil, and, according to
what the Apostle James says, receive not only bodily healing, but remission of
sins also." Opp. S. Aug. T. v., Serm. 279, n. 5. In the Statutes of Boniface (c.
29) all the faithful sick (not those "in extremis "only) are bidden to ask for
it; so also in the Excerpta of Egbert of York (A.D. V48): that "according to the
definition of the holy Fathers, if any one is sick, let him be diligently
anointed by the priests with hallowed oil, with prayer." Thorp, Anc. Laws, ii.
100. Egbert, in his Poenit. (i. 15, T. ii. 179, Th.), paraphrases S. James,
"that, if any be sick, he call his own priests and other servants of God, that
they read over him, and the sick tell them his need, and they anoint him in the
name of the Lord with holy oil, and that by the prayers of those faithful, and
by the anointing, he may be preserved, and the Lord raise him up, and if he have
committed sins, they may be forgiven him." In a canon under King Edgar, the
priest was enjoined to give unction to the sick, if they desire it (Can. 65, T.
ii. 259, Th.). Ælfric says, "If the sick layman desire to receive unction, let
him then confess him and forgive every grudge, before the unction," &c. Past.
Ep. n. 47, ii. 285, Th. A Council of Pavia (A.D. 850) still mentions bodily
cure, "That healthful sacrament, which James recommends, If any man among you is
sick,' &c., should, by a wise preaching, be made known to the people, truly a
great and very desirable mystery, whereby, if it is asked faithfully, both sins
are forgiven, and consequently bodily health restored," &c., c. 8. quoted Klee,
Dogm. ii. 322. And the Capitular of Charlemagne: "That all priests should ask
the Bishop for the oil of the sick, and admonish the faithful sick to seek it,
that they being anointed with the same oil may be healed by the grace of God,
because the prayer of faith, poured forth by the presbyters, shall save the
sick," vi. 179, quoted ib.

[419] Two Liturgies of King Edward VI. compared, pp. 366, 367. 1838.

[420] See Collier, Eccl. Hist., vol. v. p. 296.

[421] Sess. xiv. de Sacr. Extr. Unct. c. 2.

[422] Can. 2.

[423] De Extr. Unct. i. 9, T. ii. p. 1198, 9.

[424] Origen in Lev. Hom. ii. n. 4, Opp. T. ii. p. 191.

[425] De Sacerdot. iii. 6. "For not only when they regenerate us, but afterwards
too, they have power to forgive sin. For he says, If any man be sick.'" In like
way in Victor (as contained in a Catena), the efficacy is also ascribed to the
prayer. "Oil remedies sufferings, and is a cause of light and cheerfulness. The
oil then, wherewith one is anointed, signifies both the mercy from God, and the
healing of the disease, and the illumining of the heart. For that prayer worketh
all, is plain to every one; but the oil is the symbol of these things," on S.
Mark vi. 13. So, still in Bede, "We read in the Gospels, that the Apostles did
this, and the custom of the Church now holds, that the sick be anointed with
consecrated oil, and healed by prayer accompanying," on S. James v.

[426] "It cannot be poured upon those in penitence (poenitentibus), because it
is a sort of sacrament. For they, to whom the other sacraments are refused, how
can it be thought that one kind can be granted?" Ep. ad Decen. viii. 12.

[427] iv. dist. 23, q. 1, art. 1, fin.

[428] Orthodox Catechism, quoted by Blackmore, Harmony of Angl. Doctrine with
the Doctr. of the Cath. and Ap. Church of the East, p. 124

[429] P. 417, Par. 1647.

[430] "On the Laws of the Church," c. iv. p. 33, and Pearson, On the Creed, Art.
3, note p. 288. See further, Dr. Pusey, "On the Words of the Fathers quoted in
support of Transubstantiation," in "The Doctrine of the Real Presence," pp.
162-264, and "Illustrations used by the Fathers imply Sacramental Change only,"
ib. pp. 264-314, and above, pp. 32, 33.

[431] Ad IV. Dist. xi. Q. i. n. 20, quoted ib. p. 232.

[432] See on the history of that formula, Dr. Pusey's "The Real Presence the
Doctrine of the English Church," pp. 4-160.

[433] See the Doctrine of the Real Presence, p. 85, sqq. The same Divine adds
that "the form is changed;" but this is a scholastic question, and cannot, of
course, enter into the faith, which is to be proposed to the poor. He referred
my friend to a Pastoral Letter of a Bishop of Boulogne about 780, against the
Encyclopedists, who gives with approbation the following words from Archbishop
de Marca: "It may be asked, how these symbols are changed and yet remain in
their own nature. They are changed according to the invisible [inconspicua, he
suggests insensibilis,' not cognizable by the senses '] substance into the
invisible Body of Christ; yet so that that invisible substance does not cease to
be, but is attracted by the Body of Christ. But according to the visible body,
which is seen and touched, they are not changed." Then follows a statement in
the Aristotelian terms, which could not be made intelligible to any ordinary
reader.

[434] Archbp. W., Ep. T. 25, n. 99, Jan. 13, 1719, three months before Du Pin's
decease.

[435] l.c.

[436] Archbp. W., Ep. T. 29, n. 7.

[437] Archbp. W., T. 25, n. 111. The date appears from Wake's commenced answer,
ib. n. 112

[438] In Wake, T. 25, n. 98.

[439] "The Record of Archbishop Parker's Confirmation and Consecration" has been
carefully reprinted by the Rev. A. W. Haddan, from the Lambeth Register, in
Bramhall's Works, T. iii. pp. 173-210; and the Record of his Consecration from a
MS. Transcript in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, which is believed to have
been given by Archbishop Parker. Ib. pp. 210-213.

[440] Ib. n. 98.

[441] Ib. Ep. 100.

[442] Du Pin, in Wake, T. 25, lett. 98.

[443] Feb. 14, 171 8/9 , Wake, Ep. T. 29, n. 17.

[444] S. Cypr. Ep. ad Flor. lxvi. n. 7, Oxf. Tr. p. 204.

[445] Id. Ep. lv. ad Anton. n. 17, p. 129; and Ep. lix. n. 19, p. 165 and note
u. Præf. ad conc. Carth. pp. 286, 287.

[446] De Concord, vii. 20. iii. 5, 6, quoted in Allies' "Church of England
cleared from Schism," pp. 449, 450, 451-457. In quoting this book, I would say
that his second work, after that, in despair of the English Church on the Gorham
judgment, he left the Church of England, is no real answer to this, which he
wrote, not as a partisan, but as the fruit of investigations, as to whose issue
he was indifferent.

[447] T. iii. 478, quoted ib. 459-462.

[448] Præf. pp. 125. 127, quoted ib. 458. Comp. Pereira, Tentativa Theologica
(Landon's transl.), pp. 54-57, quoted ib. p. 457.

[449] Quatrième Discours, prefixed to vol. xvi. of his Histoire Eccles., L. Ixv.
ed. 12mo. I have used Allies' translation, altering an expression here and there
from the original.

[450] Cod. Eccl. Afr. can. 98.

[451] Troisième Discours, § 2.

[452] Fleury, 1. 44, § 22.

[453] See e. g. in Allies, p. 439. I have seen this lately spoken of, as it
seemed to me, authoritatively, as the annihilation of the ancient Gallican
Church, and the creation of a new French Church, by a single stroke of the pen
of the Pope.

[454] S. Matt. xxiv. 21.

[455] 2 Thess. ii. 3, h apostasia.

[456] Ib. 9, 10.

[457] S. Matt. xxiv. 24

[458] S. Luke xviii. 8.

[459] Letter to the Earl of Shrewsbury on Catholic Unity, p. 33.

[460] Symbolique, T. ii. § 37.

[461] Gladstone, Remarks on the Royal Supremacy, p. 86-- end.

[462] Considérations sur la France, c. ii.

[463] The clause does not appear to have been formally received in the West
until the Council of Florence. The conjecture of Baronius seems to be most
probable, that when, at the instance of Henry II. Emperor of Germany, the Nicene
Creed came to be sung at all at Mass at Rome (A.D. 1014), it was sung, as it was
in Spain and France and elsewhere, with the clause, "et Filio" (H. E. A.D. 447,
n. 24). Baronius (A.D. 883, n. 38) expresses himself uncertain what Pope
received it. He expresses his regret that the Nicene Creed came to be chanted at
all at Rome (A.D. 1014, n. 5). The statement of Andr. Rhod., at the Council of
Florence, that it was received by a large Western Council (Sess. 7, T. xviii. p.
124, Col.), seems a pure mistake.

[464] That there are two Arcai in the Godhead.

[465] Blackmore, Harm. of Eng. Doctr., &c., pp. 67-59, cites Theophylact, of the
eleventh century, as quoted by John Beccus, "On other occasions, I will grant
you (the Latins) the use of the expression, of the Holy Ghost proceeding from
the Father and the Son,' as may suit your speech; in common discourses, I mean,
and in Sermons in the Church, if ye please; but in the Creed, and in that alone,
I will not grant it you." This was renewed by the Bishops hi the time of the
Emperor John Ducas, A.D. 1249, that "the interpolation should be put out of the
Creed, but might be retained and used in any other form." Pachymeres, v. 12.
This was drawn out by Michael Palæol. (A.D. 1273), quoting from the Register of
the Church. He appealed to the written declarations of the Primates of that
time, "bidding them notice how those Fathers had entirely abstained from taxing
the Italians with impiety or heresy on account of their attempt to interpolate
the Creed; leaving them free to retain and read the words as they pleased,
anywhere else." The only complaint, then too, was as to "the scandal of
innovation hi changing the Creed." Tract. Zörnicav. ii. 972. In the Council of
Florence too, Mark, Abp. of Ephesus, confined himself to this one question,
"Expunge this clause from the Creed, and then place it where ye will, and sing
it in your churches on occasion, as is sung o monogenhV logoV." Ib.

[466] The "Filioque" was first adopted in the Creed in Spain, after the recovery
from Arianism, the Council supposing, by mistake, that such was the original
Creed of Constantinople. From Spain, it passed into France.

[467] It may the rather be termed "a mistake," because the Church of Rome does
not now require of the Greeks, united with her, what she then required of the
whole Eastern Church.

[468] Letter, p. 31.

[469] Homilies. See above.

[470] "A foreign Priest has pointed out to us a valuable document for our
consideration, Bossuet's Reply to the Pope,' when consulted on the best method
of reconciling the followers of the Augsburg Confession with the Holy See. The
learned bishop observes, that Providence had allowed so much Catholic truth to
be preserved in that Confession, that full advantage should be taken of the
circumstance; that no retractations should be demanded, but an explanation of
the Confession in accordance with Catholic doctrines. Now, for such a method as
this, the way is in part prepared by the demonstration that such interpretation
may be given of the most difficult [of the XXXIX] Articles, as will strip them
of all contradiction to the decrees of the Tridentine Synod." Card. Wiseman,
Letter, p. 38.

[471] P. 10.

[472] P. 18. He must mean, that, although God forgives, upon real contrition for
past sins, it is, to any one, uncertain whether he be truly contrite.

[473] P. 11.

[474] P. 13.

[475] P. 19.

[476] On our English Ordinations, it is enough to refer to the words of Mason,
Courayer, Bramhall (with the important additions of the very careful editor, the
Rev. A. W. Haddan, Angl. Cath. Lib.). I have examined in turn every objection
made to them, and it has seemed to me that Roman Catholic controversialists took
up easily any objection which might for the moment serve their turn. Cardinal
Wiseman laid all aside, and took up the ground of jurisdiction. But this
objection presupposes the truth of Ultramontanism. The metropolitical see in
each country has inherent jurisdiction, according to the ancient canons. Parker
was left in undisputed succession of the See of Canterbury, and his successors
have the jurisdiction inherent in that See. Du Pin, when satisfied as to our
Orders, felt, as a Gallican, no difficulty as to jurisdiction. Van Espen infers,
from the very terms used in the Roman Pontifical and Ordinal, that
"jurisdiction" is given in Consecration. He argues from the words with which the
Gospel is given by the ordainer, "Receive the Gospel, and go preach to the
people committed to thee," and from those in the Preface, "Give to him, Lord,
the keys of the kingdom of heaven, that he may use, not boast of, the power
which Thou givest to edification and not to destruction; whatsoever he shall
bind on earth, &c., grant to him, O Lord, the Episcopal chair, for the ruling of
Thy Church and people committed to him," that "Bishops receive their
jurisdiction from God Himself, not from the Roman Pontiff." For that it would be
"mocking God" so to speak and so to pray, without believing that the Bishop
would have that which was prayed for. Opp. T. 5, p.441. See further as to our
orders, above. Bossuet says, "This holy and Apostolic doctrine of the Episcopal
jurisdiction and power proceeding immediately from, and instituted by, Christ,
the Gallic Church hath most zealously retained." "Therefore that very late
monition, that Bis hops receive their jurisdiction from the Pope, and are, as it
were, Vicars of him, ought to be banished from Christian Schools, as unheard of
for twelve centuries." Def. viii. 12, in Allies, p. 428.

[477] Service for the Visitation of the Sick.

[478] Catechism.

[479] Communion Service.

[480] iv. dist. 13, q. 1, arc. 1, q. 3, and S. P. iii. q. lxxxii. art. vii., on
the ground of S. Augustine's statement, that orders, as well as baptism, remain
in those separated from the Church, (c. Ep. Farm. Ep. 2, c. 13, n. 28.) Both,
however, deny the grace of the Sacraments. The grace of the Sacraments belonging
to the Church alone, the undoubted presence of the grace of the Sacraments is a
proof to us, that we are in the body of Christ, in which alone He gives it.

[481] Catholicity of the English Church, in British Critic, No. 63, p. 77.

[482] The Dublin "Review" confirms this. "We fear that there can be little doubt
that in the United States the Church loses more souls than it gains. In the
second generation, the faith of the Catholic immigrant is constantly lost."
July, 1865, p. 226.

[483] Ezek. xxxvii. 7-10.

[484] Dublin "Review." Since the above has been in type, I observe a kindly
mention of Mr. Keble 's and my own recent exertions, in Mr. Oakeley's reprint of
those Articles. As to any supposed previous "quies cence," exertion has to take
a different shape, when confidence in any one has been for the time rudely
destroyed.

[485] Motto of the Tracts, "If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall
prepare himself for battle?"

[486] I asked, contrariwise, Schleiermacher in 1826, "Why the Wolfenbüttel
Fragments,' which had been thought so formidable an attack on Christianity at
one time, were thought of no more? He answered, "Wozu der Mist, wann die Erndte
da ist?" "To what end the manure, when the harvest is there?"

[487] Letter, pp. 26, 27.

[488] a) Although, in the cold phraseology of the last century, it is part of
prudence to inquire into the evidence what God has revealed Himself to His
creatures, prudence has no part in producing conviction. b) It is a truism, that
"one who rejects Catholicism" cannot "attain an explicit faith in all the
articles of the doctrines of revelation," i. e. of the Catholic faith. But this
does not affect us, except on the assumption that we have rejected Catholicism
or the Catholic faith, or any thing which is Divine, c) "Extrinsic certainty"
must mean, I suppose, what is antecedent to the gift of faith in one who comes
to the faith. For the habit of faith which God gives to Christians is internal,
and we all have it from God.

[489] The fifty answers to Dr. Colenso's first Part are much greater indications
of the mind of the people of England, than his solitary attack. His legal
position Lord Westbury has destroyed, and declared him in fact an unattached
Bishop, his patent also being invalid. Dr. Colenso has neither ecclesiastical
position, being deposed, nor the hearts of the people of Natal. The Church in
South Africa is free, and can right itself.

Index of Scripture References

Genesis

[1]11

Leviticus

[2]9

Numbers

[3]16:22

Joshua

[4]1:8

Psalms

[5]34 [6]34:2 [7]132

Proverbs

[8]8 [9]8:19 [10]8:23 [11]8:30 [12]9:4 [13]9:4 [14]9:5 [15]9:5 [16]30

Ecclesiastes

[17]1:51 [18]2:5 [19]2:13 [20]100:6

Song of Solomon

[21]5:11 [22]100:1

Isaiah

[23]11:4 [24]14:13 [25]14:14 [26]29:13

Ezekiel

[27]37:7-10

Micah

[28]1:10

Haggai

[29]1:11

Matthew

[30]10:27 [31]11:28 [32]13:44 [33]15:8 [34]15:9 [35]16:19 [36]18:18 [37]19:11
[38]19:12 [39]24:21 [40]24:24

Mark

[41]6:13 [42]7:9

Luke

[43]1:35 [44]2:61 [45]18:8

John

[46]3:5 [47]14:13-14 [48]14:26 [49]16:13 [50]16:23 [51]17:21 [52]20:22 [53]20:23

Romans

[54]5:19 [55]13:1

1 Corinthians

[56]6:12 [57]7:33

2 Corinthians

[58]2:10

Galatians

[59]3:27 [60]3:28

Ephesians

[61]1:9 [62]1:10 [63]3:1 [64]3:3-5 [65]3:1740 [66]4:16 [67]5:5

Philippians

[68]2:8

Colossians

[69]2:19

1 Thessalonians

[70]2:8

2 Thessalonians

[71]2:3

1 Timothy

[72]2:1-4 [73]6:3-5

2 Timothy

[74]2:2

Titus

[75]8

Hebrews

[76]7:25

James

[77]5

1 Peter

[78]1:7 [79]4:12

Wisdom of Solomon

[80]4:13

Sirach

[81]24:29

Index of Pages of the Print Edition

[82]2 [83]2 [84]3 [85]4 [86]5 [87]6 [88]7 [89]8 [90]9 [91]10 [92]11 [93]12
[94]13 [95]14 [96]15 [97]16 [98]17 [99]18 [100]19 [101]20 [102]21 [103]22
[104]23 [105]24 [106]25 [107]26 [108]27 [109]28 [110]29 [111]30 [112]31 [113]32
[114]33 [115]34 [116]35 [117]36 [118]37 [119]38 [120]39 [121]40 [122]41 [123]42
[124]43 [125]44 [126]45 [127]46 [128]47 [129]48 [130]49 [131]50 [132]51 [133]52
[134]53 [135]54 [136]55 [137]56 [138]57 [139]58 [140]59 [141]60 [142]61 [143]62
[144]63 [145]64 [146]65 [147]66 [148]67 [149]68 [150]69 [151]70 [152]71 [153]72
[154]73 [155]74 [156]75 [157]76 [158]77 [159]78 [160]79 [161]80 [162]81 [163]82
[164]83 [165]84 [166]85 [167]86 [168]87 [169]88 [170]89 [171]90 [172]91 [173]92
[174]93 [175]94 [176]95 [177]96 [178]97 [179]98 [180]99 [181]100 [182]101
[183]102 [184]103 [185]104 [186]105 [187]106 [188]107 [189]108 [190]109 [191]110
[192]111 [193]112 [194]113 [195]114 [196]115 [197]116 [198]117 [199]118 [200]119
[201]120 [202]121 [203]122 [204]123 [205]124 [206]125 [207]126 [208]127 [209]128
[210]129 [211]130 [212]131 [213]132 [214]133 [215]134 [216]135 [217]136 [218]137
[219]138 [220]139 [221]140 [222]141 [223]142 [224]143 [225]144 [226]145 [227]146
[228]147 [229]148 [230]149 [231]150 [232]151 [233]152 [234]153 [235]154 [236]155
[237]156 [238]157 [239]158 [240]159 [241]160 [242]161 [243]162 [244]163 [245]164
[246]165 [247]166 [248]167 [249]168 [250]169 [251]170 [252]171 [253]172 [254]173
[255]175 [256]176 [257]177 [258]178 [259]179 [260]180 [261]181 [262]182 [263]183
[264]184 [265]185 [266]186 [267]187


========================================================================
Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/an-eirenicon/
========================================================================