Year: 1870




unit in favor of the new doctrine.


II was consequently of the first acts OF the In
falbilsts to draw up postuaum to ask the Council
to declare Papal Infallibility q doctrine of the
Church. The first reports from Rome stated that
about two hundred members Of the Council had
signed the postuldtum. This number was soon in
creased to 5OO large majority of the Coun-
Gil, which at the close of the year consisted OF 74i
members


TIE POPEs VIEW or THE SUBJECT.


The party has been greatly strengthened by the open
and very emphatic sympathy of the Pope, VINO
missed opportunity to censure the opponents and
thank and encourage tho defenders of the doctrine
The Catholic papers have mentioned many
facts of this kind He has thanked the author of
every literary work in favor of the dOctrne and, at
the audiences given to bishops priests, and laymen,
frequently declared it as his opinion that the present
state of the Church required the Of the
doctrine


THE OPPONENTS OF INFAIIIBnTTY.


But, overwhelming was the majority OF the
bishops who favored the Infalibilty doctrine, and
emphatic was the support given to them by the
Pope, many were surprised at the large number OF
bishops who openly declared their dissent OF these,
only few had made known their opinion before the
meeting of the Council-foremost among them the

Bishop Dupanloup of Orleans. Most declared them
selves for the first time after their arrival in Rome.
The most compact opposition came from the Ger
mans, Austrians, and Hungarians, who united for
petition against bringing the nfaliblity of the Pope
before the Council. II created particular surprise,
that the three German Cardinals, Archbishop
Rauscher of Vienna, Archbishop Prince Schwarzen-
berg of Prague and Prince HOhenlohe of Rome did
not hesitate to join the opposition as well as all the
Archbishops. The bishops of Hungary were said to
be unit against Infalibity, the only one doubtful
being the Primate. England, Ireland the United
States and France also furnished considerable con-
tngent to the remonstrances against the doctrine.
On the other hand Italy, Spain, South America,
and the Missions, appeared almost as unit In favor
of Infallibility.


Among the opponents two parties were clearly dis
cernibe-those who personally are believers in the
doctrine and merely doubt the opportuneness, and
those who are opposed to the doctrine itself OF tho
latter class Bishop Dupanloup was best known before
the meeting of the Council but after the opening, his
fame as eclpsed by that of Bishop Srossmayer rep
resentative of the Slavic population in Hungary and
if the almost unanimous reports from Rome may be
believed one of the greatest orators of the Council
Bishop Hefcle, the learned Bishop of ROttenburg and
famous historian of the former Councils, also proved
an influential though very cautious member OF
this party Nearly all the Bishops of this party have
however, brought forward only such arguments as
impugn the opporunenesso of establishing the new doc
trine Only one Bishop Maret of France, had before
the meeting of the Council issued elaborate work.
specially Intended to show the proposed doctrines
deviation from the true constitution of the Church.
and to warn the Church against its adoption.
THE MIDDLE PARTY AND THE PROPOSED CoMPRo-


MISE


The unexpected strength developed by the opposi-
ton induced number Of prelates sympathizing
with the majority to attempt compromise, and TO
seek TO establish the doctrine in the way least Otfen
sve to the minority The chief spokesman Of this
party has been Archbishop Spalding of Baltimore,
who proposed to introduce the new doctrine less by
it's clear and emphatic declarations doctrine of
the Catholic Church than by an enforcement Of
what has been for centuries the universal practice in
the Church-the duty of every Catholic to accept the
decisions of the Supreme Ponifnot only with uncon-
ditonal obedience but with unreserved mental
assent.


THE SECULAR GOVERNMENTS


We do not enter into detailed account Of the
movements of the three parties The newspaper re-
ports this subject are generally untrustworthy,
and lack confirmation. But it cannot be doubted
that the largo majority of the bishops are now as
fully determined as ever to prOmulgate the doctrine.
We do not believe that the efforts Of secular Govern
ments will induce any considerable number of them
to change their minds. But the bishops in view of
the continuing opposition will naturally be anxious
to find the wording of the doctrine the least
Objectionable expression.


As regards, finally the consequences which the
promuleaton of Papal Infallibility as doctrine of
the Church will have, we think it almost certain
that all the bishops of the Church, with at most one
or two exceptions, will declare their unequivocal
submission to the decision of the Council The in
fallibility of an Gcumenical Council has always
been so fundamental doctrine of the Catholic
Church, that bishop will easily be induced to pro-
test AGAINST it.