same with all Councils; that it was a general belief of theologians that even a majority of a Council was no avail against a minority if the Pope sided with the minority.

"(He spoke of the Council of Rimini, had affirmed this, but on my pressing him on this, withdrew it, and said it was a generally accepted belief), that if a Pope had condemned a doctrine as heretical, there was no appeal, according to general belief; that therefore the principle of infallibility resided in the Pope, though hitherto exercised in union with the Church or Episcopate; that the possible difficulty of convening a Council in consequence of opposition of States might be a reason for affirming the truth now; but that it was always held as a truth; that undoubtedly the promise was given to the Church to be guarded from error, and kept in the truth; that it was as easy, indeed easier, to Almighty God to keep one man, than to keep a hundred; that the infallibility gift was a thing to be exercised constantly and in the intervals of Councils, and therefore could not depend on Councils.

"He said that the late Council had been promulgated sufficiently according to technical rules, that its decrees had been proclaimed publickly here at Rome, as well as individually by bishops in their sees.

"He explained the infallibility gift as an overruling guidance, not an inspiration, because this implies a means of imparting new truth; that infallibility was only a guarding against error, and directing judgment in the use of means equivalent to the promise to preserve the Church in existence; that the Pope would be speaking infallibly whenever he pronounced a judgment in such a way as to make it clear that it was binding on the Church and on consciences; that it would be assured that he had used all means to improve his judgment and weigh the questions and the opinions and decrees of the past; that it was a matter of faith that God would take care that he should not speak unguardedly, or falsely, or ignorantly; that it concerned the Pope as a matter of conscience how far he had used proper means of informing himself; but that whether he had done so or not, God would take care that only truth was declared by him; that he would be hindered from any erroneous utterance; that infallibility was in fact unerring; that thus any one might rest assured and trustful that God would be true to His own promise, and would assure to His Church the truth only as ascertainable in this way.

68

A ROMANTIC STORY.

"He considered that infallibility as to morals was as necessary as to the matters of faith, because of the connexion between faith and morals; and that false views as to morals might prevail as well as to faith, as if false definitions as to murder might be declared.

"The following is told by Mr., who had the story from a cousin of the lady in question.

"It runs as follows:

"The Pope, when a layman in the Guardia Nobile, fell in love with a Miss, daughter of Sir Fitzgerald of Ireland, was engaged, and the day fixed for the marriage in a church in Rome; he parted from his fiancée the day before the intended marriage to go to make his confession. He confessed to a Jesuit, to whom he told his engagement. The confessor said, "It must not be; that the Lord had other designs for him." On remonstrance being offered as to how to save his honour, and that of his family, the confessor said he would arrange that; that it must be left wholly to him. That evening Count Ferretti was sent off to Civita Vecchia, and there put on board a ship, and sent to Rio Janeiro; there he was ordained, and worked hard among the sick during a time of cholera. Nothing had been said by the confessor to the family to apprise them of what had been done; and the next day the bridal party, the bride, the bridegroom's best man, all assembled at the church, and finding no bridegroom, returned. Miss Fitzgerald never saw her intended husband again till one day she was in Rome; it was the election of a new Pope. She was in the square of St. Peter's; she saw the bricked-up window broken through, and heard the Dean of the Sacred College declare that Ferretti was Pope (tu es Petrus), by the name of Pius IX., and saw her intended husband enthroned behind the peacock feathers.'

"Talking with Monsignor Stonor, he spoke of the question of union having been considered, but determined to be impossible, except by absolute submission; of the position of the Papacy and Roman Church against the revolutionary spirit of the age, as finally fixed, waiting for a reaction which was to be expected; and of his amazement at the progress of Church restoration in England, of his great preference for our style of architecture, etc."

"A.D. 1873.

"Conversion of St. Paul. Dined at Mr. Marsh's, the American minister; Bishop Strossmayer and his secretary,

(

Mamiami, Vice-President of the Senate, and Borghi, were present; also Dr. Pantaleoni, Mr. Langden, Mr. Walpole, Mr. Meira, and Hemans. Dr. Pantaleoni spoke of the mixing of different nations tending to union of ideas on religion, which he thought manifestly increasing; of the hope for Italy and the Church of Rome being in bringing the clergy more under the influence of the State, and restoring the old system of electing the bishops, and so getting the present state of absolutism in the Papacy modified; and of infidelity being the great hindrance to progress towards reform; and that of 500 Members of Parliament, not above 60 could be counted as believers; of the difference of mind in our races and the Latin, we, starting from the sense of individual responsibility, the Latin races, from allegiance to a central body, in our case working from individuals to a centre, in the other cases working outward from a central authority to individuals; of the error of the Church of Rome in thinking a reaction would ever come, or its present position of antagonism ever being made good. He said, on my referring to the Bible as the guide or ground of stability, that if Italians could ever be got to read the Gospels, it was as much as could ever be expected; they would never read the Old Testament. . .

"Mr. Langden spoke of the different phases of belief, of the sections of the Church being complementary to each other, and of the strong line of division between the clergy and laity in Italy; the clergy never giving credit to the laity of being in earnest or believing; the laity never giving the clergy any credit of having any liberal ideas or desire of improvement of the state of the Church.

"The papal view is that the king has been forced on by revolutionary violence to enter Rome and remain against his will.

'They fully expect a reaction, and wait for it, possessed with the conviction that absolutism is the sole remedy against rationalism and politicalism.

"Mr. H- told me that in the late census, out of the 26,000,000 of Italians, 19,000,000 could neither read nor write. He said he was at the promulgation of the dogma of infallibility; that at the very time the thunder pealed, and the lightning struck one of the cupolas of St. Peter's, and that it became quite dark; that the Pope seemed struck by it, but recovered himself; that the account appeared in one paper, speaking of the event as the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai in thunder and lightning; that it was suppressed and

70

CONVERSE WITH DÖLLINGER.

did not appear in others. . .; that he travelled to Florence the next day, and some one with him said the Pope would lose his temporal power before the year ended. . . and it so happened; immediately after the promulgation of the dogma, France declared war against Austria."

"Talk with Monsignor Nardi.

"He considered that union was impossible, that the dogma of infallibility had been in his opinion inexpedient to enter upon; but once started, necessary to be affirmed that the devout laity would side with the bishops; that the more the State resisted the Church, the more the bishops would throw themselves back on the Papacy; but that a great struggle would come, and it would be a terrible time for the Church.

"He considered that we held only two Sacraments, and on its being urged that there was a difference, separating the two from the five others, he did not admit it. Said also that the Fathers were no rule, that they varied too much."

"Talk with Father Douglas.

"He considered that the dogma made no difference in the faith of the Church, only brought it out that the practical difference was that, now Gallicanism was impossible, it would be ipso facto heresy. He considered that the Pope could decide. of himself alone with, or without, counsel or advice of any one; that if a Council were called, and the majority went one way, he could rule it a contrary way; but that the head was not to be viewed without the body; that it was not therefore to be expected, or morally possible, that he should thus act, but that all subjects are according to individual rule weighed first by congregations appointed for the special purpose, and come before the Pope only after all possible sifting, often heard and reheard, before his final decision.

"He explained that the difference between a Beatification and a Canonization was in this: that a Beato was revered and invoked by a particular order or Church; a Santo by the whole Church.

"Munich, June 13, 1873.

"Had an hour's converse with Döllinger.

"He said that their object was to act upon the upper classes; that more would be done to spread their views, but

for the fewness of the priests who had joined them, two only in Munich, fifty in all Germany; that he did not expect a change of Popes to make any difference in the line of Roman doctrine, but that a new pope would probably come to some terms with the Italian Government, and that this would modify the state of things; that Strossmayer had not submitted, only had given his priests permission to publish the decree if they desired, but without implying his sanction or approval, and that he had not published it himself, and it only circulated in his diocese as a matter of Church news; that he paid his visit to the Pope only on condition that the dogma was not mentioned, and that the Pope accepted him thus, though the Jesuits had stated that it (was) otherwise, but that this statement of theirs had been withdrawn. On my asking about the election of Reinkens to be Bishop, he said that, having been once excommunicated, Rome could do nothing more; that his Episcopal acts would be valid, his ordinations, etc., so much so, that a priest ordained by him would be accepted by Rome without farther ordination if he seceded to Rome; and I understood him to say that his acts would be like the acts of our bishops. He added that, after examining the question of our orders, he was satisfied of their validity, and accepted all our Sacraments, etc.; he implied throughout, as we should, that the validity of ordination depended not on any link with the Roman See, but on the Canonical Rules (etc.) being observed.

"On my asking as to the prospect of reunion with the Alt Catholicks, he said, not while we were in union with the State, in consequence of the false doctrines and defects in the uncatholic part of our body (this he did not say, but acceded on my saying that I remembered his having expressed such an opinion as to our being committed to such errors and defects while in union with them), but that whenever we were separated from the State, which he thought eventually must happen, then the Low Church section would form into a distinct body, and the Catholic part of us into another body, and then the latter could unite with the Alt Catholic. spoke strongly of the State alone now keeping us together; at the same time he said we ought to hold on to the State as long as we could, that it would be unwise to hasten the separation, unwise to surrender a certain benefit which it gave us for an uncertain one. Observing on the amount of difference existing in the Alt Catholic, he spoke of time modifying and changing, the difficulty of altering long usages

He