The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-12-19
The italian Conflict.
From the N. Y, Tribune.

From the ". Y. Tribune.
The New York Times, discu ssing the failure
of Napoleon's proposed Conference, says:-
although we have thought that the meeting
Of the Conference might bring about an advan-
question could not possibly be solved by such
a method. The Pope Wiu not give up Rome
untilit is torn from him by force. And Victor
Emanuel aOiU not give up his designs upon
Rome, unless he is restrained by force. Neither
OF them will compromise, nor recede, nor back
them-which is Rome. And 1T is hard to see
how either of them can back down. II Rome
to the Pope, and if the Pope would be destroyed
by losing Rome, Italy must be destroyed by
fought for bone under the Inspiration Of
higher law Of existence than Pope and King
struggle for the possession of Rome"
Comments by the Tribune.
If the above be true statement of the case,
then it follows that the Papacy had no sub
stantive existence down to the time when
quasi political sovereignty was accorded by
the Emperor to the Pope, about the year 1913.
We Judge that no intelligent Roman Catholic
will accept this conclusion, nor affirm pre-
misses which involve it.
But we strenuously deny that there is any
necessary incompatibility between the posses
sion of Rome by Italy and the proper indie
pendence of the Pope as the head of great
Christian Church. We deny that the Papacy
has gained in power or prestige by the polltl-
cal sway accorded to its chief. Even were the
Pope made King of Italy, instead OF an insig-
nifcant fraction thereof, the Papacy would not
be benefited thereby; and, were Rome as fully
possessed and ruled by Victor Emanuel as
Florence or Turin is, the Papacy would gain
thereby in dignity and in power.
1t lost no particle of either during the
seventy years in which the POpes resided az
Avignon, nor when Plus VII was held pri-
soner of state in France by Napoleon l. And
were the Pope driven from Rome tomorrow,
and never again allowed to set foot in hat
city, the Papacy would rather gain than lose
thereby. For its power and influence, out
side of the narrow limits Of little State, is
purely spiritual, and gains nothing whatever
from its political sovereignty. In fact, 1t was
strongest, under Hildebrand, when its politi-
cal dominion was temporarily subverted,
And now, were the Pope simply Bishop oi
Rome, with no more political power than the
Archbishop of Milan or of Orleans, his
spiritual sway would be nowise impaired OF
restricted.
We make no pretense of sympathizing with
! or supporting the spiritual any more than the
temporal assumptions of the Papacy. Let each
rest on its merits, and let those uphold either
| or both who shall see fit. We only insist tha
| this assumption of an inevitable and perpetua
conflict between Italy and the Papacy-tha
| political sovereignty over Rome 'fs necessity
| to the Pope'--is at war with reason and will
history, and ought no longer to be counte
nanced. 1t is involving the Papacy in an enor
nous and ever-increasing debt to maintain I
shadow of authority which is wholly illusOry
| Rome, refusing to be Italian, becomes thereby
not independent, but simply French. And thu
longer this folly is persisted in the worse To-
the Papacy, which is educating at least twenty
| millions of born Catholics to loath 1t as the
| implacable foe Of Italy and OF human rights.