658 



ROMAN CATHOLIC CHUKCH. 



as an additional chapter to the schema of the 

 constitution de Ecclesia Christi. 



On the 14th of March a Monitum, making 

 known the mode of discussion of the schema 

 de Fide Catholica, as amended hy the deputa- 

 tion de Fide, was published. The first session 

 after the recess (the thirtieth General Congre- 

 gation) was held on the 18th of March. The 

 subsequent sessions of the council, to April 

 24th, were devoted to debates and votes upon 

 this schema. On the 21st of March the Pope 

 held a secret consistory, but delivered no allo- 

 cution. On the 22d ten bishops spoke in the 

 council, most of whom opposed the schema. 

 The vote was taken on the whole of the schema 

 de Fide Catholica collectively at the forty-fifth 

 General Congregation of the council, which 

 was held on the 12th of April. The whole 

 number of votes was 695 ; of these 515 an- 

 swered placet ; 80 answered placet juxta mo- 

 dum, handing in at the same time the modifi- 

 cations which they wished adopted. At the 

 next General Congregation, April 19th, the . 

 vote was taken on the proposed modifications. 

 The third public session of the council was 

 held Sunday, April 24th. The schema de Fide 

 Catholica, now made a Dogmatic Constitu- 

 tion, was voted unanimously, 664 fathers be- 

 ing present, and was proclaimed. It is given 

 among the PUBLIC DOCUMENTS in this volume. 



The discussion of the schema de Parvo Cate- 

 chismo was taken up at the forty-seventh 

 General Congregation, on the 29th of April. 

 The object of this schema was to give a com- 

 mon catechism to the whole Church, adopting 

 that of Bellarmiue. It was chiefly opposed by 

 the German and Hungarian bishops. The vote 

 was taken at the forty-ninth General Congre- 

 gation, on the 4th of May, and resulted : 500 

 placet, 56 non-placet, 44 placet juxta modum, 

 or conditional votes. At the fiftieth General 

 Congregation, on the 13th of May, the Bishop 

 of Lausanne presented the report of the com- 

 mittee de Disciplina, on the conditional votes 

 upon the schema de Parvo Catechismo. It 

 favored the amendment proposed by the Hun- 

 garian bishops. The Bishop of Poitiers, as 

 official reporter, presented the first report 

 of the deputation de Fide upon the schema 

 entitled "First Dogmatic Constitution on the 

 Church of Christ." This was the schema 

 which embraced the dogma of infallibility. It 

 consisted of a preamble and four chapters. The 

 debate was opened the next day, at the fifty- 

 first General Congregation. The speakers were 

 Cardinal Patrizi, the Archbishops of San Fran- 

 cisco, Messina, and Catania, and the Bishops 

 of Dijon, Veszprim, Zamora, and Patti. At the 

 fifty-second General Congregation, May 17th, 

 the Archbishop of Malines zealously advocated 

 the proposition, the Bishops of St. Gall and 

 Bri&uc, and Dr. Clifford, the English Bishop 

 of Clifton, followed. Bishop Hefele, of Rot- 

 "tenburg, author of the " History of the Coun- 

 cils," maintained the points that pontifical 

 infallibility had never been countenanced by 



the Church, and that the intention of establish- 

 ing the dogma by force of numbers was con- 

 trary to the practice of the councils. The fol- 

 lowing day (fifty -third General Congregation) 

 Bishop Hefele read an oration of Cardinal 

 Kauscher, which presented views similar to 

 his own. He was followed by Cardinal Don- 

 net and the Archbishop of Saragossa. The 

 speakers at the fifty-fourth General Congrega- 

 tion (May 19th) were Cardinals Cullen and 

 Moreno, and the Patriarch of Antioch ; at the 

 fifty-fifth (May 20th), the Primate of Hungary 

 and the Archbishops of Corfu, Tuam, and 

 Paris; at the fifty-sixth (May 21st) the Arch- 

 bishop of Cashel and the Bishops of Strasbourg } 

 Forti, and Castellamare ; at the fifty-seventh 

 (May 23d), the Armenian Patriarch of Cilicia, 

 and the Bishops of Mayence, Angouleme, and 

 Grenoble ; at the fifty-eighth (May 24th), the 

 Bishops of Sion (Switzerland), Urgel, La Con- 

 cepcion, and Guastalla. At the fifty-ninth 

 General Congregation (May 25th), Dr. Manning, 

 Archbishop of Westminster, delivered an 

 elaborate address in favor of the new dogma, 

 and was replied to by Bishop Clifford, of Clif- 

 ton, with much earnestness. At the sixtieth 

 General Congregation (May 28th), Bishop Ve- 

 rot, of Savannah, Georgia, spoke in opposition 

 to the dogma. He was followed by Bishop 

 Senestray, of Ratisbon. Other speakers at 

 this session were the Bishops of Czanad and 

 Temesvar, of Coutances, and of Grosswardein 

 (United Greek). At the sixty-first General 

 Congregation (May 30th), Archbishop Spalding, 

 of Baltimore, spoke in favor of the dogma. He 

 was followed by the Bishops of Puy, Basle, 

 Nepi and Sutri, Saluzzo, Constantino, and Ne- 

 mesis (in part.). At the sixty-second General 

 Congregation (May 31st), Archbishop Purcell, 

 of Cincinnati, and Archbishop Conolly, of Hali- 

 fax, spoke against the dogma. The other 

 speakers of this day were the Archbishop of 

 Utrecht, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, and 

 the Archbishop of Trajanopolis. At the sixty- 

 third General Congregation (June 2d), Bishop 

 Dreux-Brez6, of Moulins, spoke in support of, 

 and Bishop Strossmeyer, of Bosnia, against 

 the dogma. Other speakers this day were the 

 Archbishop of Diarbekir or Amida (Chaldean), 

 and the Bishops of Chartres and Tanes. At the 

 sixty-fourth General Congregation (June 3d), 

 the Bishops of Elphin, Pittsburg, and Sura, 

 spoke. A motion was made to close the dis- 

 cussion on the schema, in general, and imme- 

 diately carried, against the protest of the 

 minority. Up to this time sixty-three speeches 

 had been delivered on the schema in general, 

 of which thirty-six were for and twenty-seven 

 against it. There remained forty-nine mem- 

 bers of the council, who had inscribed their 

 names as intending to speak, and who had not 

 been heard. Among them was Bishop Dupan- 

 loup, of Orleans, who afterward published at 

 Naples an outline of what he had intended to 

 say. 

 A protest was drawn up by Cardinal Rauscher 



