The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-08-08
AUSTRIA.
Baron Beust's Answer to Prince Hohcn-
lehc's Circular Regarding tho Ecumeuical
aaaail

Baron Beusi's Answer to Prince Hohcn-
Iehc's Circular Regarding tho Ecume mEcal
Council.
government which, like the Aussro- Hungarian,
tons within literally constituted civil society as
Its leading principle, would. IN our Views not adj
here TO the consequences OF that principle Il were
measures to an affair which, such as the conv0ca'
ton OF general council, is an acc that has its
foundation IN the constitution OF the Church.
1t having neea laid down as general rule that the
fullest liberty must be given to the recognized re-
ii.lous communities III their internal activity long
as does not come Ill collision with the standpoint
OF the state, the imperial and royal govern.
msnt has not been sole to see saire!ent mo.
the matter stands to-day to concur in the
proposal of the royal Bavaran COVE lnent at
posai be III itself. Respecting the proceedings Of the
council, only suggestions. more or le probable,
can be made at present. not even OF tne programme
Official information been given, except the general
intimatlons contained in the Papal bull OF c0nyoca
council OF the Church the province OF purely dogma
teal questions However, as regards ths ecolestas,
Which, IN com,nson with religion ascu at the
same time also tie civil rights, 1t Is difficult to form
already to-day Judgment as to whether there Is a
have become manifest IN this respect Will be
widened by the deliberations and resolutions
OF the COUNCIL aud raised to such pitch as to tn
crease the danger for the security OF the staes We
can neither deny nor confirm the existence OF such
danger. But IN general 1t may be presumed that
the Catholic bishops, the great majority OF whom
must reside and perform their sacred functions In
countries which are governed by completely secu-
iarlzed laws win bring with them to Rome an exact
knowledge OF the practical necessities OF our age.
And il the expectation be justified that advocates In
favor OF the preservation OF peace between State
and Church Will not be wanting among tie prelates
OF the council 1t will not, perhaps be In the inter-
est OF the governments to let those voices appear
being patrOnized by the State, which might preju-
dice their authority. Furthermore. It cannot as
See (Which IN the present state Of the
to renew the precedents Of past centuries
regarding the participation Of the secular
princes III the cOunc will be towards the govern.
ments relative tO those subjects OF discussion re-
spectlng which the resolutions Of tue council cannot
be carried into effect without the recognition OF the
ever In such position that they can await the steps
OF the Church government that may become neccs-
sary IN .hIs respect. Should the approaching c0un
Gil really show signs or adopt means to tre3paSs
the sphere OF right OF tue executive power Of the
State, or should certain indications or such ten
dency manifest themselves In an authentic manner,
the imperial and royal government Is Of opinion tnat
IN that case the question could surely not be avoided
to consider how lar, besides the avertlng ana dis
suading steps Of the several States, combined de-
hDerations OF the Cabinets might become advisable
or necessary for the common protection OF the
sovereign rights OF The States. On the other hand
we cannot agree 10 diplomatic conference on the
mere presumption OF possible encrOachments upon
these rights, and TO raise thereby the appearance
coming to q distinct understanding on SO unceria ain
o basis--of intended control and restriction Of
tne liberty OF the Catholic Church and increase the
anxiety oil the minds without necessity.