in exalting intellectual indolence in the eyes of multitudes to the dignity of a meritorious religious sacrifice, thus inducing men to waive historical examination, whose culture in other respects well qualified them to enter upon such a work. But the German Bishops, so far as we can judge in this respect from their pastoral letters, have after all not yet arrived at this stage of delusion. They grant certain rights and a sphere of activity also to science, to rational examination and investigation. They themselves appeal to history, as does also the pastoral letter which has appeared under your name.

In a pastoral letter of Bishop Lothar von Kübel in Freiburg, which I have just received, we read on page nine: "Does the Pope receive new revelations ? Can he create new articles of faith? Certainly not. He can only declare that a given doctrine is contained in the Holy Scriptures and tradition, that it is therefore revealed by God, and must be believed by all." I do not doubt that your Excellency and all the other German Bishops fully assent to these words. If this be so, then we have to do, in the present confused state of the Church, with a purely historical question, and one which must be treated and decided upon only by the means which we have in our possession for this purpose, and according to the rules which apply to all historical research, the discovery of all past, that is historical, facts. There are in this case no special secret sources from which the Popes alone have the right or power to draw. The Pope and the Bishops must here necessarily place themselves, if we may use the expression, under the authority of the common law; that is, if their conclusions are to have any weight, they must apply that mode of procedure, undertake that examination of witnesses, with the necessary sifting and critical tests, which is alone able to give us truth and certainty, according to the common consent of men of all ages and nations who are capable of forming a judgment in historical matters. It was, therefore, and still is necessary to answer two questions in this way. First: Is it true that the three declarations of Christ concerning Peter have been understood in the whole Church, from the beginning through all the intervening centuries to the

present time, in the sense which is now put into them, namely as granting infallibility and absolute universal power to all the Popes? Secondly: Is it true that the tradition of the Church. in all ages proves the general acknowledgment of this double right of the Pope, in the writings of the Fathers, and the facts of history?

If these questions must be answered in the negative, it will not do to rely as Bishop von Kiibel and others do, on the assistance of the Holy Ghost, assured, as they say, to the Pope, and appeal to the obedience of faith due to him on this account for the very question to be historically proved, is, whether such assistance is really vouchsafed to him. And where has this been done up to the present time? Not in the Council, for there, as Cardoni's principal treatise proves, even forgeries were resorted to, and an utterly false representation of tradition was made with a suppression of the most striking facts and testimonies on the other side. And this is the very point which I offer to prove.

And at this point I beg your Excellency to consider that the doctrine which we are now expected to adopt, is, in the nature of the case, according to the declaration of the Pope himself and the admission of all advocates of infallibility, a, or rather, the fundamental article of faith; that we have to do here directly with the regula fidei, the regulative norm which decides what is, and what is not to be believed. In future every Catholic Christian, if asked why he believes this or that, could only answer: "I believe or reject it, because the infallible Pope has commanded me to believe or reject it." This first principle of faith, as it must on this supposition have been revealed in the Holy Scriptures as clear as the sun, can never have become darkened in the Church; in all ages, and among all nations it must have governed the whole Church, and stood in the front rank of all instruction; and we still all wait to have it explained how the Church only after 1830 years hit upon the thought of making a dogina of a doctrine which the Pope in a letter addressed to your Excellency under date of Oct. 28th, calls ipsum fundamentale principium catholicae fidei ac doctrinae.

How was it at all possible that the Popes should for centuries. indulge whole countries, whole schools of theology in denying this fundamental article? And where was then the unity of the Church, if there was a division in the very foundation of faith? And may I add?-why was it that your Excellency yourself struggled so long and persistently against the proclamation of this dogma? Because it was not opportune, you say. But can it ever be inopportune' to give to believers the key to the whole temple of faith, to proclaim the fundamental article on which all the others depend? Here we stand in very truth giddy on the brink of an abyss which opened before us on the 18th of July.

If any one wishes to ascertain the far-reaching consequences of the late resolutions, let him faithfully compare together the third and fourth chapters of the Decree, and realize what a system of the most complete universal authority and spiritual dictatorship is here presented. Every Catholic is henceforth to recognize in his conduct and believe in plenary power over the entire Church as well as over every individual member, as it has been claimed by the Popes since Gregory VII. and expressed in the numerous Bulls since the Bull Unam Sanctam. This power is boundless, incalculable, it can make itself felt, as Innocent III. says, wherever there is sin, can punish any one, suffers no appeal, is arbitrary sovereignty; for, according to Bonifacius VIII. the Pope carries all rights in the shrine of his bosom. Since now he has become infallible, he can in one moment, with the little word "orbi" (i. e. addressing himself to the whole Church,) exalt any ordinance, doctrine, or demand into an infallible, indisputable article of faith. In opposition to him there can be no right, no personal or corporal freedom; or, as the canonists say: the tribunal of God and that of the Pope are one and the same. This system bears its Roman origin on its forehead, and it can never permeate the Germanic countries. As a Christian, as a theologian, as a historian, as a citizen, I cannot accept this doctrine. Not as a Christian; for it is incompatible with the spirit of the Gospel and the plain. teachings of Christ and the Apostles; it aims to establish pre

cisely that government over this world which Christ declined; it demands that authority over the congregations which Peter forbade to others and to himself. Not as a theologian; for the whole genuine tradition of the Church is in irreconcilable opposition to it. I cannot accept it as a historian; for as such I know that the persistent endeavor to actualize this theory of absolute authority over the world has cost Europe rivers of blood, confounded and degraded whole countries, broken down the beautiful organic constitution of the primitive Church, produced, and fostered and maintained the worst abuses in the Church. As a citizen, finally, I must reject it; because, by claiming submission to the papal power on the part of States, monarchs and the whole civil order, and an exceptional position for the clergy, it opens the way for endless, ruinous strife between Church and State, between clergy and laity. For I cannot conceal from myself the fact that this doctrine, the consequences of which were the destruction of the old German Empire, would, in case it should acquire the supremacy in the Catholic part of the German Nation, lay the seed of an incurable disease in the new Empire just established.*-Accept, &c.

Munich, March 28th, 1871.

I. VON DÖLLINGER.

* I have just read the following in the official organ of the Roman Curia and the Jesuits, the " Civilta" of March 18, 1871, p. 664: "The Pope is supreme judge of all civil laws. In him the two powers, the spiritual and the temporal, flow together as in a point; for he is the Vicegerent of Christ who is not only the Eternal Priest but also King of kings and Lord of lords;" and immediately afterward: "The Pope is in virtue of his high dignity at the head of both powers."

ART IV THE GERMAN BISHOPS AS WITNESSES OF THE

TRUTH.

Tract for the Time, composed from Authentic Documents, by a Catholic Priest, with the motto: De ore tuo te judico. Luke 19: 22.

TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, BY THE REV. E. W. REINECKE, NAZARETH, PA.

I.

THE Pastoral Letter which bears date September 6th, 1869, and is addressed by the German Bishops assembled at Fulda to the members of their dioceses, is subscribed by the Archbishops of Cologne and Munich, by the Bishops of Breslau, Würzburg, Fulda, Mentz, Hildesheim, Paderborn, Augsburg, Treves, Osnabrück, Eichstädt, Ermland, Culm and Speyer, the Apostolic Vicars of Saxony and Luxemburg, the Capitular-Vicar of the Archdiocese of Freiburg, and the Bishop elect of Rottenburg. In this pastoral letter occur the following passages:

"Fears are expressed that the Council might, and no doubt would, proclaim new articles of faith, which are not contained in the revelation of God or the traditions of the Church; and also establish principles, which might be detrimental to the interests of Christianity and the Church, incompatible with the just claims of the State, with civilization and science, as also with the proper liberty and the temporal welfare of the peoples. This is not all even the Holy Father is charged with intending under the influence of a party, to make use of the Council as a means of raising unduly the power of the apostolic see, of changing the old and genuine constitution of the Church, and of establishing a spiritual despotism incompatible with Christian. liberty. . . . The suspicion is accordingly openly expressed, that an untrammelled liberty of discussion would not be granted to the Gerinan bishops, and that these bishops themselves