part in the deputation, which on the 15th July, made the

most urgent counter-representations to the Pope — representations which M. de Ketteler essayed to render still more emphatic by his prostration at the feet of the Pontiff. These representations, it is well known, were made in vain. The only consolation offered to the prelates, mourning over the loss of their orthodox dignity, was limited to the wording of the decree, which provided that the power of the bishop is an ' ordinary' one (that is to say, in the language of the Roman canonists, a ' potestas ordinaria subdelegata'), and that the Pope considered it his duty to support the same was proved by a mutilated quotation from Gregorius the Great : but if this passage had been quoted com- pletely, together with others, it would have proved to the world that this Pope of the seventeenth century repelled from him with the profoundest aversion as a blasphemous usurpation the idea of such a universal episcopacy as is now intended to be established.
" And here I beg your excellency to consider that the doctrine which we are now to adopt forms by its own nature, and by the declaration of the Pope himself, by the confession of all infalli- bilists, a fundamental article of faith — that it is a question of the regula fidei, of the rule which must decide what is to be believed and what is not. In future every Catholic Christian can only answer the query why he believes this or that as follows : — ' I believe, or deny it, because the infallible Pope has commanded me to believe or to deny it.' This first principle of faith, as the Holy Scriptures necessarily should most clearly show, can never
219
have been doubtful in the Church — it must at every date and among every people have governed the whole Church like a brightly shining star — must have been placed in the front of all instruction ; and we all wait for an explanation of why it is that only after 1830 years the Church has started the idea of making an article of faith of a doctrine which the • Pope calls, in a letter addressed to your excellency on the 28th of October, ' ijmim fundamentale principimn Caiholicce fidei ac doctrines.' How can it have been possible that the Popes should, during centuries past have exempted whole countries, whole schools of theology, from belief in this ' fundamental article of faith?' And — may I add — how is it that your excellency yourself strove so long and so persistently against the enunciation of this dogma ? Because it was not opportune, you say. But can it ever have been ' inopportune ' to give to believers the key of the whole temple of faith, to announce to them the fundamental article on which all the rest depend? We stand all of us giddy before a chasm which opened before us on the 18th of July last.
"He who wishes to measure the immense range of these resolutions may be urgently recommended to compare thoroughly the third chapter of the decrees in Council with the fourth, and to realise for himself what a system of universal government and spiritual dictation stands here before us. It is the plenary power over the whole Church as over each separate member, such as the Popes have claimed for themselves since Gregory VII., such as is pronounced in the numerous bulls since the bull 'TJnam sanctam,' which is henceforth to be believed and acknow- ledged in his life by every Catholic. This power is boundless, incalculable ; it can, as Innocent III. said, strike at sin every- where ; can punish every man, allows of no appeal, is sovereign and arbitrary, for, according to Bonifacius VIII., the Pope ' carries all rights in the shrine of his bosom.' As he has now become infallible, he can in one moment, with the one little word 'orbi' (that is, that he addresses himself to the whole Church), make every thesis, every doctrine, every demand, an unerring and irrefragable article of faith. Against him there can be maintained no right, no personal or corporate freedom — or, as
220
the canonists say, the tribunal of God and that of the Pope are one and the same. This system bears its Romish origin on its forehead, and will never be able to penetrate in Germanic countries. As a Christian, as a theologian, as a historian, as a citizen, I cannot accept this doctrine. Not as a Christian, for it is irreconcileable with the spirit of the Gospel, and with the plain words of Christ and of the Apostles ; it purposes just that establishment of the kingdom of this world which Christ rejected; it claims that rule over all communions which Peter forbids to all and to himself. Not as a theologian — for the whole true tradition of the Church is in irreconcileable opposition to it. Not as a historian can I accept it, for as such I know that the persistent endeavour to realise this theory of a kingdom of the world has cost Europe rivers of blood, has confounded and degraded whole countries, has shaken the beautiful organic architecture of the elder Church, and has begotten, fed, and sustained the worst abuses in the Church.
" Finally as a citizen, I must put this dogma away from me, because by its claims on the submission of states and monarchs, and of the whole political order under the Papal power, and by the exceptional position which it claims for the clergy, it lays the foundation of endless ruinous dispute between State and Church, between clergy and laity. For I cannot conceal from myself that this doctrine, the results of which were the ruin of the old German Kingdom, would, if governing the Catholic part of the German nation, at once lay the seed of incurable decay in the new kingdom which has just been built up. —
" Accept, &c., (Signed) "I VON DOLLINGER."
"Munich, March 28, 1871."
Dr. Dollinger's most convincing letter could not be answered : and therefore, soon after writing it, he was excommunicated. Since his excommunication, he has not been left without sympathy on the part of his co-religionists. The King has even written him to express his condolence with him and admiration of his conduct
221
t
and character. Dr. Dollinger's election as Rector of the University of Munich is the latest evidence that Rome's thunders cease to frighten the German people, even when they cleave to their old religious convictions.
"THE TABLET' ON MONTALEMBERT'S LETTER
OF FEB. 28ra, 1870. "The Tablet" (Vatican Supplement}, Mar. 26, 1870.
The real founder of "Liberal Catholicism," considered as a project for reconciling the Church with what are called " modern ideas," was perhaps De Lamennais, though nothing was further from his original intention. He had all the gifts necessary to the master of a school, and among his disciples were such men as Lacordaire, Gerbet, De Salmis, and Montalembert, It is not without interest at this moment to enquire what were the princi- ples and professions with which this school, whose chief was to end so dismally, commenced its career. Their first act was an uncompromising profession of Ultramontane doctrines. In the Univers of the 19th, we find a copy of the Declaration in which the editors of the Avenir proclaimed to the .Church and the world their principles and intentions. "At this day, more than at any other period," they said, " Catholic writers must redouble their vigilance and precautions in order to assure themselves that they are not departing in any point from true doctrine. The tra- ditions and the history of the Church indicate to them the most certain means of securing this object : they have only to address themselves directly to the Holy See, the infallible guardian of the truth. When, therefore, we formed the resolution of combating, in a moment of difficulty, in the cause of Catholic faith and liberty, our first glance was turned towards that Chair from which light and wisdom descend upon the whole Christian world." After some further observations, they proceed to make a solemn profession of faith, which bears the signatures of the thirteen men connected with the Avcnir, including Lacordaire and Montalembert. " We profess the most complete submission to
222
the authority of the Vicar of Jesus Christ. "We neither have nor wish to have any other faith than his faith, any other doc- trine than his doctrine. We approve all that he approves, we condemn all that he condemns, without a shadow of restriction, and each one of us submits to the judgment of the Holy See all his writings, past or future, of whatever nature they may be. In accordance with these principles, deeply engraven on our souls, we reject Gallicanism with all our strength ; first, because the declaration of 1682, which is its formal expression, has been re- versed, annulled, and reproved many times by the Holy See, without distinction of the articles ; and secondly, because the doc- trine which it implies establishes at once anarchy in the spiritual order, and servitude in the political.
Even this did not satisfy the eminent men who were afterwards to exercise, in various positions, so powerful an influence upon their generation. They proceeded, therefore, to enumerate vari- ous propositions in order to pronounce condemnation upon them. The first which they named was this : "A General Council is superior to the Pope." The second, — that " the monarchical form in the Church was not instituted immediately by Christ," they reprove by quoting the very words of the Theological Faculty of Paris, in which this proposition, asserted by Mark Antony de Dominis, was condemned as " heretical, schismatical, subversive of hierarchical order, and destructive to the peace of the Church." The third, that " the judgment of the Roman Pontiff in matters of faith is only irreformable after the assent of the Church has been joined to it," Montalembert and his distinguished col- leagues rejected for these reasons : (1) " because the Popes have never permitted that any doubt should attach for a moment to their decisions addressed to the whole Church ; (2) because this proposi- tion is contrary to the profession of faith sanctioned by the Eighth General Council, which defined that they are separated from, the communion of the Catholic Church who do not IN ALL THINGS profess the same belief as the Apostolic See' ; and (3) because of certain conclusions inevitably resulting from this false proposi- tion ; — such as, either that the Pope might fall into error, and so lead the whole Church astray, contrary to the promise of Jesus Christ; or that the Episcopate could lead the Pope back to truth,
223
which implies that the centre of unity may exist outside the Roman Church ; " — suppositions, they add, " which we reject as directly contrary to the Catholic faith."
Without noticing all the details of this remarkable Declaration, it will suffice to quote its concluding sentences. " If in the principles which we profess there be anything contrary to the faith or to ' Catholic doctrine,' we supplicate the Vicar of Jesus Christ to deign to admonish us, renewing to Him the promise of our perfect docility. God forbid that we should ever substitute our personal opinions for the tradition of the Church, of which He is the Sovereign interpreter. The very phenomena by which we are surrounded, and the vast chaos of conflicting opinions, are only too plain a warning to us how much each individual should distrust his own weak and limited intelligence. For us, sub- mission is not only our first duty as Catholics, but is, so to speak, our very being as writers. One word of revolt from our mouths would be the suicide of all that we can utter. For it is our first principle, the vital principle of our writings, the very life of our understanding, that truth is not a treasure belonging to ourselves ; and from our doctrine on human reason to our faith in the Chair of eternal truth, we are, as it were, on every side enveloped in the atmosphere of obedience. We will finish, by the grace of God, as we have begun. After having passed through days full of trial and combat, when our last sigh shall have announced the close of our toils, we cherish the hope that men will be able, without being contradicted by a single incident of our lives, to engrave on our tombs these words of Fenelon : 0 HOLY CHURCH
OF JEROME, IF EVER I FORGET THEE, MAY I FORGET MYSELF ! "
Paris, 2nd February, 1831.
F. DE LAMENNAIS, Priest. P. GERBET, Priest. ROHRBACHER, Priest. H. LACORDAIRE, Priest.