ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 



661 



tho question of infallibility. The publication 

 by tho Augsburg Gazette of tbo twenty-ono 

 canons " de Eccletia " appeared to tho Ein- 

 peror Napoleon's Government to modify in a 

 .MiiL'iil.-ir manner the ground on which it bud 

 hitherto taken its stand. Those resolutions 

 touched mixed matters, with regard to which 

 the French ministry thought it would not be 

 justified in maintaining the neutral and expect- 

 ant attitude it had purposed to sustain. The 

 French Government would bo satisfied with a 

 Frencli bishop explaining in tho council the 

 condition and the rights of the country. The 

 note concluded by proposing a modification 

 of the programme of the council so as to ad- 

 mit such a representative, even if it should bo 

 found necessary to prorogue the council. 

 Count Daru's dispatch did not make any threat 

 in the event of a refusal being received from 

 the Vatican. , Cardinal Antonelli, in his reply, 

 represented that a bishop could not reconcile 

 the double duties of an ambassador and a 

 father of the council. Nevertheless, he would 

 not decline to receive observations from France 

 before the discussion on any particular ques- 

 tion, but he could not undertake that the 

 recommendation which might be given would 

 be adopted. 



Subsequently, M. Emile Ollivier, having be- 

 come Minister of Foreign Affairs of the French 

 Empire, dispatched the following note to the 

 Marquis de Banneville, French minister at 

 Rome: 



PABIS, May 12, 1870. 



MONSIECB L'AMBASSADEUR: The Emperor's Gov- 

 ernment has not hud itself represented at the coun- 

 cil, although the right of doing so belongs to it in its 

 quality of mandatary of tho laics in the Church. To 

 prevent ultra opinions from becoming dogmas it 

 reckoned on the moderation of the bishops and on 

 the prudence of the Holy Father, and to defend our 

 civil and political laws against the encroachments of 

 the theocracy it counted on public reason, on the pa- 

 triotism of the French Catholics, and on the ordinary 

 means of sanction which it can dispose of. In con- 

 sequence it only paid attention to the august char- 

 acter of a meeting of prelates assembled to decide on 

 great interests of the faith and of salvation, and 

 merely imposed on itself one mission to assure and 

 protect the entire liberty of the Council. Warned 

 uy the rumors current in Europe of the dangers 

 which certain imprudent propositions would entail 

 on the Church, desirous of not finding the aggressive 

 forces organized against religious belief receiving 

 any additional strength, it departed for an instant 

 from its attitude of reserve to oft'er suggestions and 

 give advice. 



The Sovereign Pontiff did not think fit to listen to 

 the former or to act on the latter. We do not insist 

 upon them, and resume our previous position of ab- 

 stention. You will not call forth nor enter into any 

 conversation henceforward either with the Pope or 

 with Cardinal Antonelli relative to the affairs of the 

 Council. You will confine yourself to learning and 

 noting down all the facts, all the feelings which pre- 

 pared them, and all the impressions which succeed 

 each event. Have the goodness to inform the French 

 prelates that our holding aloof does not betoken in- 

 difference, but is for them a sign of respect, and, 

 above all, of confidence. Their defeat would be ex- 

 ceedingly bitter if the civil power, by its intervention, 

 had not prevented it ; and their triumph will be all 



the more precious if they owe it only to their own 

 effort* and the force of truth. Accept, Mr, etc. 



EMILE OLLIVIER. 



The following confidential dispatch was ad- 

 dressed by Count von Arnim, the representa- 

 tive of the North-German Bund, to Cardinal 

 Antonelli 



BOMX, May 23, 1870. 



MONSJONOE: Tho Imperial Frencli Government 

 has acquainted us with the memoir relating to tho 

 Council which your Holiness has been pleased to re- 

 ceive from the hands of the French ambassador. 

 Having been called upon by the Cabinet of the Tui- 

 leries to support the observations made by it to the 

 Holy Father, as President of the Council, the Gov- 

 ernment of the North-German Confederation has not 

 hesitated to join in steps which are considered timely 

 and even urgent by many Catholics, who wish the 

 deliberations of the Council to result in a work of 

 religious and social peace. 



Indeed, the Government of tho Confederation 

 would neglect its duty if, in the face of the deep 

 emotion prevailing in the Church in Germany, it did 

 not confirm tho identity of the views as developed in 

 the French memoir with the serious apprehensions 

 which have taken hold of the minds m Germany, 

 who are startled at the thought that resolutions of 

 the Council, arrived at in spite of the almost unani- 

 mous opinion of the German episcopacy, might cre- 

 ate painful positions by imposing an everlasting 

 conflict upon the dictates of conscience. This is not 

 all. It is notorious that neither the German bishops, 

 who, in our eyes as well as in those of the Holy See, 

 are the legitimate representatives of the German 

 CatholicSj nor the episcopacy of the Austro-Hunga- 

 riaii Empire, have been able to adopt the views which 

 appear to sway the Council. Our bishops have at- 

 tended to the duty, by documents published in the 

 press, the authenticity of which has never been dis- 

 puted, of pointing out in advance the deplorable re- 

 sults to be apprehended if, without heeding the 

 opposing voice of a considerable minority, the su- 

 preme authority of the Church and the majority of 

 the Council would proceed to ordain certain decrees 

 which, by introducing in the form of dogmatic defini- 

 tions serious changes in the limits of authority ap- 

 pertaining to each degree of the hierarchy, could not 

 fail at the same time to impair the mutual position 

 of civil and religious power. Such decrees, tar from 

 being only vague threats for the future, seem rather 

 calculated to revive old and sufficiently known Papal 

 constitutions which people of all times and nations 

 have constantly opposed, and to surround them with 

 a new dogmatic sanction. The proclamation of such 

 principles to-day from the lofty position of the Papal 

 chair, and their maintenance by all the means of per- 

 suasion at the disposal of the Church, would, we 

 apprehend, cause confusion in all the relations be- 

 tween Church and State, and bring on crises which, 

 in spite of its traditional wisdom, the Papal Govern- 

 ment may perhaps not have contemplated, because 

 of its being less able than ourselves to judge of the 

 public mina in our country. There is one point of 

 especial importance to which we would direct the at- 

 tention of the Papal Government. 



In Germany, Catholics and non-Catholics must 

 dwell together peaceably. There exists a current 

 which, under the influence of daily relations and 

 constant intercourse, without doing away with the 

 distinction of creed, has at last brought together the 

 different persuasions in such a manner as to justify 

 hopes that at some future day all the living powers 

 of Christianity might be united for jointly combating 

 errors from which the world is suffering already to 

 the great inj 

 to be appret 

 would DO ft 

 that the tendencies contested by our bishops', and 



