Mgr. the Bishop of Orleans, Mgr the Arohbishop

R MG . THE B HO P O F O RL AN IS E S,

GR AR HBI H P O F MAL M THE O S O INES .

F I R ST L E

MO N EI N E DE H A MP S G U R O S ,

A . GR A TR Y ,

’ ’ ’ ' ’ P retre de l Omtozre Mmnbre de Z A cadémze n azse. , a g

T RANSLATED FR O M T HE FRENCH BY

T J BAIL . EY . B A , . . ,

P riest o the Church o En la f f g nd.

LO NDO N

J . T . HAYES LYA LL , PLACE.

S IMP! IN MAR S HALL A ND c o PAT E , , . , RNO STER Row.

BRIG HT O N G : . W A ! ELING . It is un e rstoo t at t is le tte r like all m ot er d d h h , y h

orks sim l re re sent s the o ini n of the aut or and w , p y p p o h , doe s not in the ratoire in an wa b d O y y. r A . GRATR ,

Priest o f t he O rat ire o ,

’ TRAN SL ATOR S NO TE.

As se eral of the t ranslations of hi c the Latin te t v , w h x is i e n are not stric tl lite ral I t ink it ri t t o add g v , y , h g h that the t ranslations are made from the Fre nc h of

ather ratr and not e xclusivel from the Latin . F G y, y

J B . T . . FIRST LETTER TO MO NSEIGNEUR THE

AL ARCHBISHO P O F M INES .

N I N MO SE G EUR, In your reply t o the Observations of the Bishop

o f O s ou the o f s rlean , y complain of cry alarm rai ed by the illustrious Bishop at the aspect o f t he present h u You ﬁl w t dang er of t e Ch rch . are led i h g rief on

t s u t ou t t t t is t hi acco n , and y ell him ha here nei her dang er nor doubt in the path in which you bid him

follow your st ep s .

s u it s s the t To me, Mon eig ne r, eem con rary and

t s u t o t o ou o u hi I now endeavo r prove y , praying y t o g rant me all the att ention o f your enlig ht ened mi u t a k u t o nd and g enero s hear . I s yo allow me t o enjoy the beneﬁt o f that charming humility which is

t st o f o u t ou t charac eri ic y , and which will permi y o

st t o t wa s o li en an opponen , placed , in every y, far u below yo . ” t o t s ou s u t t I hope be able o how y , Mon eig ne r, ha ,

u t o the s of O s o u in yo r reply Bi hop rlean , y have u u t been working pon false doc men s . By reas on o f the rapidity of that work fo r which at t his moment ” ou n o t sufﬁ t su ou no t y had cien lei re , y have been

u s t o the s able yo r elf verify all pa sages . They have

u ourc nﬁde n Didn ot the s t ab s ed y o c e . ame hing happen “ t u s hi t t o . s t o s a Contra S Thoma Aq ina , in regard r c , errores Gree comm The Dominican de Rub eis admit s the fact in t he edition of 1 7 He only

s t he t o f the t t defend good fai h grea and holy doc or ,

was s s s t it is which in no wi e nece ary , any more han

u s u t o u o wn . needf l , Mon eigne r, defend yo r The g reat est minds and the noble st heart s are always

s t r more ea ily deceived han othe s . They never

sus t u n ot s pec a fra d They do imagine a fal ehood ,

s o do n o t i h t . N s u t e and believe ow, Mon eig ne r, — same passag e s which deceived Saint Thomas and

t falsiﬁ c atio ns t t as as many o her , bo h ancien well

t s— r t recen one have deceived yo u directly o r indi ec ly .

s s u o f falsiﬁ c atio n s r s o I peak , Mon eig ne r , prope ly t called . I speak o f interpolations and fraudulen

ut t s t u t the st t m ila ion , in rod ced in o mo cer ain and

st t t s u e e u mo venerable ex s . Thi yo shall s for yo r

s t s ut . elf, and here can be no di p e

afﬁ rm— ou se e it t o o s u I and y will , Mon eigne r

I f t t th r is s o f t s st a ﬁrm ha e e a chool apolog e ic , among

u s the t st whom are fo nd holy men , ome of grea e

s t ri st s mind , and many excellen Ch ian , who are all deceived t og ether by the blind pas sion o f a certain

u o f t s t ns the t n mber wri er and heologia , by par ial

t o f s o f t st s g ood fai h everal hem , and , la ly , by fal e hoods properly so called and by falsiﬁ c atio n s know in l t g y prac ised .

t s is ss s u t o All hi nece ary, Mon eigne r, explain what this s chool both says and commit s t o print

” mon itio r i d lum rimum Fat e r ic lai in the S e e Ad ae a a uscu . p v op p h N o , e iti n 1 660 Paris was alre a u n the t rac e s the rau s ich d o of ( ) , dy po of f d wh e c e i e aint h mas d v d S T o . 5

upon one of the g randest fact s o f all ecclesiastical — hist ory upon the fact of Pe pe Honorius and the

i t o t u . t s s ss w VI . Co ncil All hi nece ary , explain ha h t u t s u t a M r. as t s s g Manning wri en pon hi bjec , well as t o explain yo ur own reply upon that point and h t s t o t e s O s . o her , Bi hop of rlean

The fact s are as follows

u st is t o us was I . The q e ion , whe her Pope Hon ri

t the . u . condemned as here ical by VI Co ncil , or no

No w the s o f s s u , chool which I peak , and who e arg

t s ou t wi t ut t o sa men y adop , ho having , I am bold y,

suf t t u s —t s s ﬁcien ly veriﬁed hem for yo r elf hi chool , I

sa u t s t s : It t ai s t s y, now nder ake hi main n and in end

t o t t r us was n o t r t t u prove ha Hono i he e ical , al ho gh

he - was condemned as such by three CEc ume nic al

u ls o f s o Co nci approved by Pope , and , m reover, by

t u s wo Roman Co ncils over which Pope pre sided .

t it t t us w as They admi , mark well , ha Honori con

' de mn e d s s t s as t t s t , in expre erm , here ical by ho e hree

u il s b ut t t t o f t t t t Co nc ; hey main ain , in Spi e ha , ha ” i n s o t t . t s s o n e o f the he here ical Cer ainly, ay

rs o f t hi s r u t t he defende a g men , I read in u ‘ VI . Co ncil these words Anathema t o the heretic

‘ ’ ri us Anathema H norio hcere ti o But the Hono o c .

u st is t is the o f t s r q e ion , Wha meaning hi wo d hazretico We must again det ermine the sen se of the word by the circum st ances under which it was

u st e the t u the prono nced, in ad of inferring na re of 6

crime condemned from the word employed t o ”1 ss it expre .

t o th s o f u Therefore , according i mode arg ing , when I hear read a s ent ence o f condemnation for “ t ft or no t t o the t u o f he homicide , I am infer na re ” the crime from the word employed t o expre ss it . The man condemned in expre ss t erms fo r homicide is s t t perhap only condemned for hef .

us th t f h un a t e o t e . s Th , from fac VI Co cil, hey

t us t n ot the admi , declaring Honori here ical, I have rig ht t o infer that Honorius was condemned as f h th heretical . Inst ead o inferring t e nat ure o f e l ” the t o e x re s s it ust crime from word employed p , I m

st the d se e t it u n o t ﬁr examine wor , and whe her co ld

s t s s s t w u mean ome hing el e be ide here ical , which o ld h u w t o sa t due s t t o t e . allo me y, wi h re pec VI Co ncil,

t u it su t t t H us and , in fac , relying pon for ppor , ha onori

as not t t s su u w here ical . Unhappily for hi ab rd arg

t it is t s t ul s s ut men , , in hi par ic ar ca e, ab ol ely

t as the u u e t s the imprac icable ; for, Co ncil en m ra e all heretics which it condemns on the g round o f mono

the lism s t u m , and condemn hem all nifor ly and con

s e c utive l t he s Anathema S er io y by ame word, g

’ hce rettco anathemaH onomo hce re ttco anathema P mho , , y , ” hoere tioo it is s s t o t t t the , impo ible main ain ha word ” heretical in this continuou s passag e has two — different meaning s o n e for Serg ius and Pyrrhus

the t us s t s t e and o her for Honori , who and be we n

1 “ t u e s reli ie use s IJéc e mb e r 1 869 . E d g , , , p 7

It is t ul e vasion ‘ which am them both . a pi if , I ,

s t o u f su t t s . perhap , wrong q ali y in ch g en le erm

t su te the s s st st Ano her ppor r of ame y em, whil

tt as ust do the t o f the c onde mna admi ing , he m , fac

t t s out of the dif u t t hi s Ye s the ion , ge ﬁc l y in way ,

ult t s t Pope was wrong . The fa of hi Pope consis s s t s r t de s in a, perhap exag g era ed , con ide a ion (

t - éré It ménag ement s pen etre e xag g s) . is this which aut horised the Fathers t o envelope

h t t the t him in t e ana hemas ag ains here ics .

O s s t t o t s ul t t as nce a imila ed he e , he co d be rea ed t ” hey were .

who s ul u t of Therefore , a Pope ho d only be g il y

i t t t t s or s s hav ng en er ained , ei her for doc rine per on ,

a erha s eaa erated consideration —t s , p p gg , hi Pope ,

t t ut s s his u s t o him for ha alone , a hori e j dg e envelope

h o f s t u in t e cri me here y . O nce enveloped h s among st

t s ss t t o t t is here ic and a imila ed hem , here no long er

aut us a ut anyt hing t o be c io bo . He may be over

his t s u t s t t whelmed , wri ing b rn , him elf ana hema ized

the t u An inn n and expelled from Ca holic Ch rch . o c e t

t us at st enve lo ed t assimilated man may h be ﬁr p , hen ,

and then condemned.

t t the s t o s the wi See , hen , whi her wi h olve follo ng

r : l st t o mit the ut t o f p oblem may lead , ad a hori y

( u u l s 2nd t o t as one is Ec menical Co nci ; , admi , com

e lle d t o t t t s u s us p do , ha he e Co ncil condemned Honori

as t 3 rd t o t t t ri us here ical ; and, , main ain ha Hono ” was n ot t i h . s s u s t e a here ic Thi , Mon eigne r, dilemma in which they have succeeded in placing

you . 8

‘ ' M r 'M u1 ha th1s x os ms t o g . an ng s in e p ed hi elf a ‘ ' ‘ an r b elie e his own s he re sis t . v s real d ge If I word , utter n h ly a d entirely t e t hree Councils . He knows as well as We do every pas sag e o f these Councils wh u a t c s s . t t ich ondemn Honori here ical Wha , hen , does he oppo se t o them ? The very lett ers o f us ni . . o wn s Honori Mgr Man ng , if I believe my eye ,

s s t o invit e s the s t o his r is eem reader , whom cha g e

ss t o u t s s t s le tt ers b urnt addre ed , j dg e for hem elve he e ,

as t t he u b ut here ical by VI . Co ncil, which , happily,

a e su e u t t o v t he t o f h v rviv d n il now, pro e or hodoxy

the u t s s is as excomm nica ed Pope . The pa age ' “ folldws: H t o ul n o t b e ~ b s ere ical he c d , for i own . “ lett ers remain t o prove the orthodoxy of his ” t t a t t eaching . With such simplici y s his do hey

a ul th u h ( u u nn e j dg ment of t ree Ec menical Co ncils . With such resolut ions as t his do t hey expose them

s s t o t i t t so t t elve every h ng, when a ma er impor an i u t s in q es ion .

n M r x s No w t o t d s . , wha da g er oe g Manning e po e

‘ P It i t o th r hims elf ? Shall I dare t o s ay . s e dang e

f t a it s o u t . x s excomm nica ion E raordinary may eem ,

di t r M r . t s g Manning , by hi bold procee ng wi h rega d

t o t u s his t hree general Co ncil , by formal approba ion

o f a t as im ious ernicious wri ing condemned p , p , h u — he e tical burnt as su t e . . r , ch by VI Co ncil Mgr t at the t t t Manning , I repea , if we look ma er li erally

andst t has t u u t ric ly, eviden ly inc rred excomm nica ion “ f i so acto o r latw s ententiw u t t t . o p f , en ncia ed in i le I

the u t us : Are recent bull of Pius IX . which r ns h 9 subject t o excommunication ip sofa cto Or latw senten tiw

t s t s e m all and singular here ic of wha oev r na e .

as well as all t hose who favour and defend them - in “ whatever O s ac s in ulo s any manner . mne g

i un u c e nse antur haeret c o s quo c q e nomine .

’ e orumque faut ores ac g eneralit er quo slib et defeu ’ sore s f

M t the il f . But r . o o II , leaving g Manning per

t m t o has s se t u ana he a which he expo ed him lf, I re rn , i s n u t o u tt . t ss Mon eig e r , yo r le er In I read, I confe

” wit t t s e W s ou ss t o h amazemen , he ord which y addre

“ “ th f ul u r e Bishop o O rlean s . How co d yo r G ace have had the courage t o recall t he question s

L us us and already decided of iberi , Vig ili , Hono

us ? As t o r us far r m t m n ri Hono i , f o eaching o o

theli sm his tt s t o r u he s , in le er Se g i 0 _ formally

t u t h e the a gh t e contrary . I hav whole passag e

r b ut n o t sit it e . befo e me , I will They

s t t th ( u en a clearly how ha e VI . Ec m ic l Council di d n ot dr eam of condemning Honoriu s as person

u t o f r s b ut as ui t o f ally g il y he e y, only g l y neg li ” g ence .

s u t o o the ss Well, Mon eig ne r, I have whole pa age

wi s b ut s before me, and in my memory like e, I hall

t it It is l ci e . as fol ows :

The VI Council says Anathema t o the heretic H u s . the u onori Therefore VI . Co ncil condemns us as t Honori here ical . The whole passag e runs t hus Anathema t o the heretic Theodore Anathema t o the heretic Cyrus ! Anathema t o the heretic Honorius ! Anathema t o the heretic Pyrrhus

e heere tic e t ! haere tic o Theodor , ana hema Serg io ,

t ! O e haere tic o t ! H ana hema yr , ana hema onorio

haere tic o t ! haere tic e anathe , ana hema Pyrrho , ” 1 ma ! Anathema t o the heretic Honorius ! Is t s s u the ss r s hi , Mon eig ne r , pa ag e which clea ly prove t t the u n t ha VI . Co ncil ever dream of condemning Honorius as g uilty o f here sy P The Council says I anathematize him as ” i It i n t t u . t . Yo u s o s here ical reply, r e He n ot t here ical . “ . u s s : a or The VI Co ncil ay We h ve , m eover, ex

elle d the t u anathe p from Holy Ca holic Ch rch , and

matiz e d us who was P e e o f R Honori , p old ome , becaus e in his lett ers t o Serg ius we have recog niz ed that in everything he has foll owed the same doctrine ” n hi u s Cum hi and co ﬁrmed s impio s dog ma . s

s ul s t De i c athe lic a s vero im projici a anc a eccle ia,

simul ue anathematiz ari raevidimus e t H on orium q p , ,

ui fue rat anti uae R ae e o u inve nimus q Papa q om , q od

ri t ue e o t su t ad S e r ium per Sc p a , q e ab fac a n g ,

ui us e us t se c ut us e st e t im ia q a in omnib j men em , p ” 2 d nﬁ r it og mat a c e mav .

Is it t s u t t the u eviden , Mon eig ne r, ha Co ncil by t s ss t o f hi expre ion , never dream condemning Hono

1 ar uin Conc il . . iii . 1 3 86 H do , , v . p . 2 ar ouin Conc il . iii . 1 33 4 H d , , v. p . . 1 1

t P It s the t us rius as here ical declare doc rine impio ,

f us the s e t a that o Serg i , and am here ic l, and for

p H e norius di which , hol ng and conﬁrming in every t the s us t is as hing ame impio doc rine , condemned

ou t o the u t t it is heretical . And y reply Co ncil ha

t o f the us t no hing kind Honori , far from eaching ” h l u t th r t s as t e t . mono heli m , forma ly a gh con ra y “ u s s : v us t o The VI . Co ncil ay We ha e ca ed be

the tt of us t o us have read le er Honori Serg i , and

ou d it alto ether alien rom the A ostolic teachin f n g f p g ,

the de nitions o Councils the doc rine o the eminent ﬁ f , t f

hol Fathers t t t s it ws the y , and , ha con rariwi e, follo

he t s t fals e t eachings of t here ic . We al og ether ” t t t as s ul - st rejec hem and abhor hem o de roying .

lit ut re t rac t ant e s e t e ist olam e Simi er a em ( ) p ab ill ,

e st re scri t am ad e umde m S e r ium id , Honorio p g b asque inve nie nt e s o mnin o alienas e xist e re ab

st s do matib us e t de ﬁ nitio nib us s t apo olici g , a anc

u c e nciliorum e t cunc t e rum re b ab ilium at rum or m , p p , se qui vere falsas doct rinas haere tic orum : e as omni

e ab icimus e t t u animae n e xia e x m do j , anq am s se ” 1 m r c ra u .

t s t s s s the u And he e wri ing , ay Co ncil ag ain ,

t s s u - st t s he e profane and o l de roying wri ing , we us t o u nt u s th have ca ed be b r before , for eir ” complete annihilation . Et praevidimus profana e t animae pernicio sa c ontinue ob perfe c tum ext er ” 2 mi u n r m ni m igne c o c e ari .

1 ar uin Concil iii . 1 3 31 . H do , . , v. p . M ns i a v ix. . 564 , . , p . 1

t us i h I u s u t e V . Speaking h , Mon e g ne r , Co ncil , in

u n t u n ot r t yo r opinion , evide ly co ld have d eam of

i us as t condemn ng Honori here ical .

ll B ut t s i n o t a . t III . hi s See how his c o nde mn a “ tion of Honorius as heretical ( Anathema Honorio

hoeretico u the . u il w as prono nced by VI Co nc ,

h CEcume ni conﬁrmed by t e VII . c al Council in the

' t erms following : We proclaim in our Lord two

wi s t wo t s wit the u ll and opera ion , and h VI . Co ncil

t u s r u s us r u s we rejec Sergi , Hono i , Cyr , Pyr h , and Mac arius and all thos e who follow t heir

‘ in De inde ue u t u lun t t te ach g . q q e e d as ve t a e s e duas o pe ration e s s ecundum n at urarum proprie t at e m in Christ o pree di c amus : que madme dum Constanti

s t us e xclamavit ab icie n s S e r i um nopoli ex a Synod , j g ,

' H on o rium C rum P rrhum Mac arium t u , y , y , a q e ” i tis s e ntie nt e s imilia S s .

‘ u ci t t The VII . Co n l says ag ain We ana hema ize the madness o f Arius and that o f Mac e do nius

the t s o f r us rus us and mono heli m Se g i , Hono i , Cyr , li t t ” us . Pyrrh , and all who be eve wi h hem

An athe matiz ant e s A r i ve saniam Mac e do nu rab ie m i ,

He n e rii e t O ri e t P rrhi e t as s Serg ii , , y , y , e

' clarum e orum un us m n e uam s v e lun i , im o q mori , ” 2 it t u t t . . u s a em The VII Co ncil , in rn , here con

us us as t t ou t dem Honori a mono heli e and y main ain ,

he . st the . u s t ag ain VII Co ncil , which conﬁrm VI ,

1 in Concil . iv . . 4545 H ar u . . do , , v , p 2 ar ouin Concil . . xiv. . 474 . H d , , v , p 1 3

t t us t t s has ha Honori , far from eaching mono heli m , ” u h r r formally t a ght t e cont a y .

Do e s the ( u u s t u s en VII . Ec menical Co ncil peak h

assant N it s s t us it s s us p o , peak h in olemn concl ion ,

it s m t t t the in dog a ic decree , af er reci ing Nicene

r the t u st the C eed , and ana hema prono nced ag ain all

t s t t here ic who have at acked his Creed .

r u s s t t he . u The efore , nle we rejec VI . and VII Co n

ls ust t t t r u s w as as ci , we m admi ha Hono i condemned t h l. B ut t e u t t here ica we ﬁnd VIII . Co ncil imi a ing

the . s s us t r t VII , al o in olemn concl ion , af er eci ing

t he in it s t s Creed, dog ma ic decree , aying , We “ the ( u a u acknowledge VI . Ec menic l Co ncil, which

f s tw o s t wo t s s us st a ﬁrm will , opera ion in Je Chri ;

wi t it at e t S us and h we an h ma ize Theodore , ergi ,

us P u t 1 10 us t r s Pyrrh , a l, and Pe er, mp pa iarch of ‘ st t an d t o e t h r t t r us Con an inople , g e wi h hem Hono i

of us Mac arius o f Rome , Cyr of Alexandria , and

t ollowers o the im ious doctrines o those An ioch , f f p f ” h h an t am eresiarchs Apollinarius and Eutyc e s . S c

e t u rs S n o dum susc i ie nt e s es nive alem y p , qu in unius Christi duab us naturis c e n s e qu e nt e r etiam duas ope ration e s ac t otidem ve lunt at e s s api e nt e r

asse ruit An athe matiz amus ut The o dorum a em ,

ui u t e 1sc o u s e t S e r ium e t P rrhum q f i p p Pharan , g , y ,

e t P aulum e t Pe t rum 1m 1 0 s rae sul e s st n t , , p p Con a i

n o e lit ane rum c s ae t u c um e is H on orium p E cle i , a q e

a una c um O e Alexandriee n e e n on e t Rom e , yr , Mac arium Antio ehiae qui malae opinionis Ape llinarii et Eutyche tis 1mpi orumhaere siarcharum 14

” 1 d t n t se c a tes . the og ma a Therefore VIII . Council decrees t hat Honorius is condemned as a follower of the imp ious doctrines of monothe lite heresiarchs and

st the . u as st the t o ag ain VIII Co ncil , ag ain w pre

c di s ou t t t us is n t e ng one , y main ain ha Honori o a

f o f t s s s s ll ollower he e here iarch , ince he forma y t th t eaches e con rary .

D s it st l s t o ou s u t t t s oe i l eem y , Mon eig ne r, ha he e t hree Councils never thoug ht o f condemning H us as t t t t t is ? D onori here ical , and ha ha clear o

ou st l t st t s t u s y il main ain , ag ain he e hree Co ncil ,

t t H us has t u t t s b ut ha onori never a g h mono heli m , has formally t aug ht the contrary

Do yo u maint ain that t hree ( Ecumenical Councils

st b ut th t us w as no t s t ? were mi aken, a Honori mi aken ’ M r d rléan f r And do you still blame g . O s o having

the u t o t s u st s alread had co rag e recall he e q e ion , y decided ?

t t t b ut ou In very ru h , hey have been decided ; y i u s e e now n what sen se . O nly yo do not ye t know

ll the u nor the i t a j dg es all w nesses. The other j udg es and the other witne ss es are these

h t f th st t e ut o e P s . IV . Fir , a hori y ope

s t t P u a Pe pe Adrian II . declare ha ope Honori s w s accused o f heresy : Ou1 super haere si fue rat ” ac c usat us .

1 ar ui n Concil. b v . . 914 H do , , . , p . Mansi Am l COIL x i 12 , p . , v . , 6 . 1 5

L hi f L st t o . e e . s u t t o i en Pope S II , in o ﬁcial acco n t t t e s the Emperor . We ana hema ize alike h e

inve nt ors o f e rror s o f new , Theodore, Bi hop P rus of Al a us us haran , Cy exandri ; Serg i , Pyrrh , ul t tt s st t t l t s Pa , Pe er, plo er ag ain , ra her han pre a e of the Church o f Const antinople ; and also

' Honori us who not u t s sto , did ill mine hi apo lical

u t the t of st t dit Ch rch wi h doc rine apo olic ra ion , b ut u t t t t t o su t it s , by a fo l be rayal, a emp ed bver ” t an the m iz mu n spotless faith . Pari er a at a s e vi

e rrori s t s e st The e dorum Pharani inven ore , id , ,

t u E iS O O um C rum Al exan drinum S e r ium an m p p , y , g ,

P rrhum Paulum Pe trum Const antino e lit anae y , , , p ecclesiae sub se ssore s mag is quam praesule s ne e

H onorium ui a o st olic am Ec cle siam non , q hanc p

non a o st olieae t raditiOnis t lust ravit se d p doc rina , profana proditie ne immaculat am ﬁ dem sub vert ere ” 1 tu t cona s e s . I hast en t o add that thi s Latin t ext appears t o be t s t f the C re ek ff s the ran la ed rom , which di er from f L t on e w ord. st o the word conatus est a in in In ead , the G has wa e ai a e s has ermitted reek p x pn , which mean p ,

t r has given opportuni yfo —. What ever it may b e whether t o attempt by a feul s t o su t the t o r ul acrileg e bver fai h , only by a fo sacrilege has g iven Opportunity for subvert ing the f t —thi s is no b ut s — t ai h mere neg lig ence , here y ac ive ,

ff t u t . s ss o f t Le o i e ec ive, and g il y Thi pa ag e Sain s then far from proving that they never thoug ht o f

1 Héfélé ist . dos onell. . iii . . 26 , H C , v , p 7. 16

c H r us as u t s b ut ondemning ono i g il y of here y , only It i ui u t t as guilty o f neg lig ence . s q t e t r e ha the

s L e o . t t o the a s s s ame Pope , II , wri ing Sp ni h Bi hop , ” u B t le t u s se e t ses the word neg ligence . u whe her “ the All t s this s econd t ext cont radicts ﬁrst . ho e

who as t t s st the u t of st , rai or ag ain p ri y apo olic

t t e e t t c o n radi ion , have been cond mn d wi h e ernal

de mn tion e d o f us a , nam ly, Theo ore Pharan, Cyr ,

us as as us who n ot as Serg i , well Honori , did ,

b e ﬁtt ed sto t r t u h t h o f apo lic au ho i y, q enc e ﬂame ut t i s b n e r s e it . u here y, , by eglec ing , ch i h d Q

e e a su a o s olic e t raditio nis uritat e m v r dver m , p t e p

e r ue lli e ne s e xtit e an t ab e nte s u est a p d r , u q idem ern

c o de natio n lc at su id e st e us n m e mu t i nt , , Th odor

’ Pharanit nu r s A ex us us us a s, Cy u l andrin , Serg i , Pyrrh ,

’ ‘ u us t us o nst an in e lit an i c umH on o rio Pa l , Pe r , C t op , ,

i ﬂa m re tie i o tis non ut de c uit q u m am b ee d g ma ,

a o st olic am auc t o rit at e m in c i ie nte m e xtinxit p , p ,

‘ ” 1 e d i T t the ﬁ re s ne g lige ndo c o nfov t . o neg lec

h o t t e e r c t o f the t o whic breaks u in h v y en re fai h , t

the t of hi e e e t o rove mself ‘ t us fail in du y s ﬁ , p hi h a t t r a nst h t e f t adi n c o n se e , rai o ag i t puri y , r tio , and u t t o t t t n i not q en ly meri an e ernal condemna io , s

n c c e merely a a t of neglig en . The same Pep e w rites t o ! ing Erwig a : All the “ a uthors ef this impious doc trine; Condemne d by the s nten of the abl C oun i ha e e ce vener e c l , v been

e t d fro mC at o . unit na 1 h o e of . me r jec e h lic y, y, , fT eod r haran C us ~ o f A ilr s ulu P , yr dexan ia, S erg iu ” Pa s,

1 Har ouin Concil . iii . 1 730 d , , , .

1 8

t us us P u a nd new here ical dog ma , Serg i , Pyrrh , a l ,

t o f st t t t t r us Pe er , Con an inople , og e her wi h Hono i ,

t t rs ss t t who fomen ed heir perve e a er ions . E iam s anct um se xt um Concilium Univers ale prae dic amu s

ui u t s n e vi haere tici do matis S e r ium q a c ore g , g ,

P rrhum Paulum e t P e t rum st t y , , , Con an inopoli

t e s una c um ui ravis e o rum ss an , Honorio , q p a er tionib us foment am impe ndit nexu perpetui ”1 h i inx run anat e mat s de v e t .

i t s the R But we have ye t another w nes . All oman

s u t the l 6th t u t the Breviarie , n il cen ry , men ioned

us condemnation o f Honori . I have before me a

a o f 1 5 20 t at uri h Roman Brevi ry , prin ed T n , in w ich ,

h t Le e u 28th the on t e s . fea of S , J ne , I ﬁnd con 2 de mnatio n of Honorius

s r us us In which ynod were condemned Se gi , Cyr ,

us r u s u t r s Mac arius Honori , Py rh , Pa l , and Pe e , al o

t his s t Pe lichre nius wi h di ciple S ephen , and , and

who s s t r i o n e Simon , a er ed and p ocla med will and ” “ r t ua Operation in o ur Lord Je sus Ch i s . In q

s e c e nde mn ati su t u s rus us ynod n Sergi , Cy , Honori ,

r us u us e t trus n o n e t Mac arius Pyr h , Pa l , Pe , nec ,

c um disc i ulo su e t h s e d e t P olichro nius e t p S ep ano ,

ui u ve lun t at e m e t o e ratio n e m Simon , q nam p in ” D J e su st dixe runt rae dic ave runt omino Chri o vel p .

s s s is r it Thi pa ag e e specially rema kable . I have

t s it u s ut before me , and ran cribe f lly and con ec ively ,

1 P . Garnie r Lib e r iurnu s 4 1 , d , p . .

1 20 in s rit l i li - 3 8 r m. de 5 c a a b t u e e . Ro e e aint e Ge ne vie B v , B o h q S v , B B ,

im rim a. urin e n e t t ann e 1 2 p é T c e é 5 0. 1 9

- rd It s s t t without omitting a wo . imply declare ha

us the st was t he Honori , like re , condemned by

u the u t f VI . Council fo r having t a ght ni y o oper

sus r st—t t is t o sa the ation and will in Je Ch i ha y, heresy of monothelism .

t s t is t t o di s ut . Ne w t s In hi here no hing p e , hi same condemnation appears in all the Roman

s u t the r t o f t . Breviarie n il eforma ion Clemen VIII ,

h 1 h tu the li s at the beginning of t e 7t cen ry . In brarie

at s the r t t . G e Pari , Impe ial library , and ha of S enevi ve , I have examined a larg e number of Roman Breviaries

t o the l 6th t u o f t u prior cen ry, and in all hem I fo nd this condemnation of Honorius .

s u is n o t t s t o r u Frankly, Mon eigne r , all hi hree fo r t s s is it n o t t u s us t t ime deci ive , and r ly candalo ha ,

the s o f su ss t s s s in pre ence ch a ma of fac , per on should continue t o disput e t hem H o w can t his marvel be explained It can only be explained by what I have already said at the

o f t s t t r is at the beginning hi le er . The e pres ent

sc ho ol e rro r u u s s day a of , fo nded pon pa ion , blind — s s he t - ss a s s t ne , and headedne chool eeing no hing

st t o t r r t o and li ening no hing , p epa ed deny every thing and t o afﬁrm everything in the s ense in which it i t urr l si self h ied a o ng . Behold it s mode of action B e th hist orians and theologians have proclaimed this fact : That Pope Honorius w as condemned for here sy by three (Ecumenical Councils approved of

t he s two u s s by Pope , by Roman Co ncil pre ided over

s the e ntiﬁ c al r ss o f t by Pope , and by p P ofe ion fai h in 2 0

u t ur s t s force d ring several cen ie . The fac are before t he eye s of the world the pass age s are everywhere ; t r i n t it s s t o u s s t . he e o hing , eem , di p e

At t s t u the s st t t hi very momen , pon imple a emen o f t s o o s t t t was fo r hi pr p i ion , ha a Pope condemned

r s t he s s it s s s t o he e y , chool , which believe mi ion be the r t t of the us s t o st us s p o ec ion Papacy , ref e li en , ref e t o us s t o r u s examine , and r he headlong defend Hono i . It overthrows everything which s eems t o witne s s

st r t r t e again him ; and , b aving every h ea of exe m munic ation it t s u t t h o un s , rample nder foo ree C cil an d s t u t r the t ﬁve Pope , wi ho eckoning ancien Pro “ “ f n iﬁ a t e s sio n o f o t c al t . 0 s p fai h N , y hey , he

was r t r t never he e ical; for , far f om eaching mono

h li m h u t the r t e s as t t . , he formally a gh con ra y

r t c u n o t fo r his t t rs He e ical he o ld be , own le e hi t h ” remain t o prove the orthodoxy of s eac ing .

t s t the t u t s n o t And , in hi mad conﬂic , ho gh doe even st t t t t he tt s o f r us are n o t rike hem ha , if le er Hono i

t t he u has t u s t here ical, whole Ch rch for cen rie ana h e matiz e d as t t here ical a wri ing , a man , a Pope ,

r t t t t o n u st t pe fec ly or hodox ; and ha , a q e ion of fai h an d t t s t r u s t t s dogma ic fac , h ee Co ncil and wen y Pope have ob stinat ely deceived thems elve s in their mo s t

m r n o t s e e t t to s s . ole n dec ee They do ha , in order s o n e t s t t t ut ave Pope , hey acriﬁce wen y, wi ho reckon in t r u s s s t g hree gene al Co ncil , who e decree hey t rample under foot

f t t t in t s t is t s I a ﬁrm hen , ha hi here nei her cience ,

so u t t t u rea n , arg men , reg ard , nor any in ellec al ope r 2 1

It is s t int o x ation what ever . a Specie of ver igo , of

s r he t s it ic atio n unable t o di ce n t objec before .

But t d s it t t s o f the hen , how oe happen ha mind

st su as s t s highe excellence , ch ome of ho e which I

s a r the t t It have een , are c r ied away by orren

r s s t s t t t r w t ut e xc e a i e from hi fac , ha eve yone , i ho p t s ma ion , may deceive him elf and , above all, y be

It s s t s t t t s f deceived . ari e from hi fac , ha a chool o

r x st s s us e t ut it er or e i , which make , wi ho knowing , — of a long tradition of fals ehood and fraud a school

t r u has which , by a ma erial f a d , already deceived t t u s s s . s u s a s ho and of mind , S Thoma Aq ina mong

t rs is n e w at t s s t o he , and which able , again hi pre en

t o the st t t s l day , deceive mo in elligen and e pecial y the ur st s are o f su s t p e mind , which incapable pec ing u a fra d and believing a fals ehood . I shall speak pres ently o f these falsehoods and t s r u s b ut rst ust t u t o t t he e f a d , ﬁ I m re rn ha which

s u concern Honori s .

r le t u r VI . He e me add a s mma y o f t he det ails of

the r t t us s o t at t s u st g ea fac of Honori , h hi q e ion

t he s t u st d. may be , in igh of everyone , a q e ion decide

1 r the l 6th t u . Befo e cen ry no one ever denied 1 t t us w as the u ha Honori condemned by VI . Co ncil . Before t hat century no o n e ever ut tered a doubt of th u t t h e t t e t s the . u o r a hen ici y of ac of VI Co ncil ,

1 The main art t his summ r p of a y I have b orrow e d from a di s s e rt ation in L atin b Fathe r Garn ie r e it r the Lib er Diu/rn u s a is s e rt at i n y , d o of , d o hic h re maine un ub lishe unt il n e w and hic h M de Ro siére h s . a w d p d , w ust i e n t o the rl in his su le me nt t o the Lib er Di urnu j g v wo d pp s . 22

t t the tt s o f st t o r t s o f L e o ha of le er Con an ine ho e II . Since the l 6th cent ury no one has ever cleared from dust the s mallest monu ment raised in favour o f

Honorius .

2 1 608 the t o f u s as . In collec ion g eneral Co ncil w

t at R u st the prin ed ome , by order of Pa l V . Among

t f the u s o . s ss . su s r ac VI co ncil , e ion XIII , b c ibed by t e t s o f the s t is u the h leg a e Apo olic See , fo nd con de mnatio n o f us Pre 1 ci s t Dei Honori , j a anc a

Catho lic a s simul ue anathe matiz ari eccle ia , q Hono ” “ rium X I s ss V . ; and in e ion we ﬁnd , Honorio ” heere tic o t ana hema . h i 3 . t e t In se ssion XVIII . dog ma ic decree s g ned

st t i t is t by Con an ine s recorded . Ana hema here pronounced ag ainst the heretic Honorius in these t t ” erm s Sergio e t Honorio ana hema .

4 t r s t o the E r . Af er which the Fathers add e s mpe or the r t t he t st ﬁnal decla a ion , in which ana hema again

r us a s Et c um his H o no rium Hono i ag in appear . ,

ui u t a rae sul ut o t e ui e o s his se c utus q f i Rom e p , p q in t e s .

5 t o P e e t . t s t The Fa her wri e p Aga ho, and

r u h s mention Hono i s among st t e Bishop condemned .

An athe matib us int e rfe c imus . S e r ium g , Hono

m . rium C ru . , y

6 st t t s the u t . Con an ine accep Co ncil by an edic in

is t us was which men ioned Honori , who Pope , and

h i u t e s . us u t who conﬁrmed here y Honori , q f i “ t ues a hu us di haere se o s c o n an iq Rom e Papa, j mo

ﬁ rm r at o . 23

r s t o thi s s tt s t o 7 . The Empero add ome le er

L his t t he u . e e . II , declaring accep ance of Co ncil

the his tt . r s t o Leo II eplie Emperor, and in le er

a t t s us as na hema ize Honori , having by a profane “ bet rayal ( profana pro ditie n e suffered the im

t o de ﬁle d maculat e Church Apost olic be .

t r s t s t s tt s o f 8 . Yves de Char e men ion he e le er h ’ t Le o . is Decret IV . II in , par

9 . L e tt s t o t . e II . wrot e hree le er Spain In all t t he t s the t o f hree of hem , men ion condemna ion Honorius Qui ﬂammam haere tic i do g matis incipi ” e nt e m x inx li nf i e t it se d c o ov t . non , neg g endo

1 0. s t s s t o Erwi a The ame Pope wro e be ide g , King o f s s us as Spain , and de cribe Honori having been “ condemned for having consent ed that the rule o f t fai h should be de ﬁl e d. 1 f 1 . u o s The XVI . Co ncil Toledo g ive an ab stract o f t s t . he e le t ers in chapt ers I and II .

1 2 h ( u t o f t . u . The ac s e VII Ec menical Co ncil four t s u t the t o f r u s At ime reco n condemna ion Hono i . the it s t it ronouuc e s end , in dogma ic decree , p h u anathema ag ain st t e heretic Honori s .

1 it 3 . . u s t The VIII g eneral Co ncil , in dogma ic “ t t s us Anathe mat iz amus decree , ana hema ize Honori . ” H on o rium Romae .

14 r h h t t . t e is orian s Vene able Bede ( ) , almo a con

r f th t o e . u t s t t us empora y VI Co ncil, rela e ha Honori t was condemned by his Council . 2 4

Diurnu 1 5 . Liber s the P s s The , in rofe ion of faith

the - t s s s u s t t made by newly elec ed Pope , how ha each t o us was it ime H nori condemned by afresh . 1 6 . Liber P onti calis t o t The ﬁ , in reference Sain L e o . s wi t the Liber Diurnus s s II , ag ree h , and de cribe u h s as t e . Honori condemned by VI Council .

1 7 . the Liber P onti calis t t From ﬁ are ex rac ed ,

fo r t he tw o st uo word for word , Roman Breviary, in r t s fo r the O f o f L e o . ion ﬁce Pope II , in which Hono ri us appears among st the heretics condemned by the u VI . Co ncil .

’

18 . t s his Decre t t ha s . s Yve de Char re , in , par IV , extract ed from the Liber P ontiﬁ calis the passag e

t t t us rela ing t o he condemna ion of Honori .

1 9 r s the t s the . Pope Ad ian I . approve of ac of h t t . u t e s VII Co ncil and deﬁni ion of fai h , which he

u s t t he o f s hono r wi h name creed , and in which appear

h u ag ain t e condemnation o f Honori s .

‘ 20 rdi t . u s Ca nal H mber , peaking , in a polemical

f h u t s the t o t e . work, VI Co ncil , men ion condemna ion f u o Honori s .

2 1 th L a t . st s u s e s Ana a i ibr rian , him elf a de ermined

o f u s wr t s t t the defender Honori , i e however, ha

u u t a st u VI . Co ncil prono nced ana hema gain Honori s

L t ui s t s t us as heretical . ice h c ex a anc a Synod “ qu asi haere tic o anathema dixe rit e t in De i s oliu s ” t u re rob ati nis t n fo d rit j udicio jam po si m p o elo c o e .

2 2 Hin c mar t st s us in his . , con emporary of Ana a i ,

t t u the r t s s t t us rac pon Holy T ini y, ay ha Pope Honori

the u for his s was condemned by VI . Co ncil Opinion

" 26

‘ t tt s n ot do matic t s at all ? priva e le er , and g wri ing

s t t s ri u u Thi canno be mean e o sly . The Co ncil

s s t ri t decide s ot herwi e . The e dogma ic w ings must be broug ht before us the copie s of the do g matic lett ers t reating o f the pre s ent dog matic

question . We have read a second time thes e

do t tt s the a s s s t gma ic le er , which fore aid per on wro e ” u s o rt e t n dogmat ically t o . O p ad o s adfe rri re g e st a ac dogmatica script a fact a super

' u stio n r praes enti dog matica q ae e . Re t ac t an t e s

- tic as e ist olas ua su radic tis e rs o nis dog ma p , q e a p p m i t u t do g at c e s crip a s n . Exemplari a do g mati ” 1 i l rum carum e p st o a . “ s it t o s s Lu They wi h appear, ay Cardinal la zerne ,

t t t n ot as P e e b ut as t s . ha he wro e , p , a priva e per on t But t hes e le tt ers are replies . Will hey say t hat

it was t o the u r us n ot individ al named Hono i , and

t o the Pe e t t i us t ? t sa p , ha Serg wro e Will hey y

it w as t o his s n ot t o his ontiﬁ c al per on , and p

hr niu t ut ? ut t t t . S o o s s s a hori y, ha S p en dep ie Will

t sa t t it was as t s n o t hey y ha a priva e per on , and

as t t s ? It is as Pope , ha he commanded ilence ” 2 t t w t as t t Pope ha he ro e , Pope ha he erred

T HESE TH INGS YOU ILL P AGE W I us HZEO W RE TH , ” NOBI SCUM FRATERNTI‘AS V RA PRZEDIOET t Pe e EST , wro e p

r u t u u hi Hono i s o Serg i s . Honori s g ave t o s lett ers

the the s t t t e ul all force , all olemni y ha a P pe co d

t o t at t t t it was the ust g ive hem , ha ime when c om

1 M n i XL . 5 43 4 a s 5 5 5 58 5 78 . , , p , , ,

Sur la e clarati n . 3 58 . d o , p 2 7 t o reply t o Churches which consult ed the Roman

u b ut t he st st s Ch rch , when apo olical epi le never explicitly declared t he int e nt l on of addres sing the

u —an t t has whole Ch rch in en ion , moreover , which

t o b e r ss t is no need exp e ed , when a declara ion made

t u st h it i u . s s w s pon a dog ma ic q e ion Be ide hic ,

t r s ut t t at t s the s en i ely beyond di p e ha hi epoch Pope , the (E u u s the u n o t c menical Co ncil , whole Ch rch had t he s mallest doubt of the compet ency of Councils t o

as r t his t tt s condemn a Pope he e ical , in dog ma ic le er destined t o det ermine t he dog matic t eaching of the whole East ern Church .

t s t us t VII . The fac being h and en irely beyond

s ut o u s u the st di p e , y will imagine , Mon eigne r, a on ishme n t ust t a t s , which I m have fel , when I re d ho e “ words of yours which I here repeat : I have the whole pas sage before me which clearly shows

( u t hat the VI . Ecumenical Co ncil never dreamt o f

us as uilt o f s b ut condemning Honori g y here y, only il ” as g u ty of negligence .

N it is s u t t the t t ow , Mon eigne r, ha I have righ o s a t o ou t t ou n o t the t t o sa t o y y , ha which y had righ y the s of O s Ye s s u ou w Bi hop rlean , , Mon eig ne r, y ere

st . the s o f O s w as n o t mi aken No , Bi hop rlean m st Y u . o s u u i aken in any way , Mon eigne r , in yo r

tt t o the s o f O s ou st le er Bi hop rlean , y were mi aken

r t o r t o u on eve y poin , ra her y have been deceived by ss s u t a ma of fal e doc men s. 28

Ye s ou b e e n ti , have deceived by a rand collec on y — g o f fals e assertion s the fruit of g reat ig norance and

s t — s t st mediocre inceri y which , for ome ime pa ,

u t u t s su t is have been c rren pon hi bjec . There a

rt t s t t ce ain mode ofApologe ic , a cer ain polemical Spiri ,

is t n o t the f s o f o ur t which cer ainly o f pring ime , and

t u the O ld st t has which Holy Scrip re , in Te amen ,

r t t s t r s al eady branded wi h he e divine and erril wo d , “ very necessary t o meditat e upon : Has God then

o f u s s t t s t u need yo r fal ehood , ha ye peak decei f lly ” fo r Him ? Numquid in dig e t Deu s mendacio ” 1 s t e ut Eo lo uamini dole s ve r , pro q This hard speech is addres sed by Job t o his

s u t o ust s friend , who endeavo r j ify Providence by fal e

t t f s u u s . t s s o s arg men Are hen he e friend Job co ndrel ,

s s s s s t forg er , hamele liar No , hey are Simply men , su the st t as st ch , for mo par , mo men are all, or

st t t su almo all of whom , when hey believe hey are p

t a us it s por ing g ood ca e , defend by every mean in t — u s u t s the t s s heir power heap p fal e arg men , emp ine o f which t hey t hem selve s are aware of conceal fact s

s s t u u t t s which embarra hem ; and add ce ncer ain fac ,

u t No w as t t t . which , even hey proclaim hem , hey do b , it is this ﬁrst degree of dishonesty that the Holy Spirit

s t o r t us s wi t t s brand wi h , ra her cr he h , hi reproach H as God need o f your deceit and your fals ehoods

But t tu st r s t s , in all in ellec al ife , mingled amid ho e that are blind and t ho se that are carried away by

ss t s the s t he t s . pa ion , here are al o liar and chea

1 i ul . J ob xi i . 7 (V g ) 29

N is st t the ow, here a remarkable in ance of wha cheat s are capable of.

the ast r t the a How, in l refo ma ion of Rom n

r r u : t he s ri t t o t s ut B evia y, co ld c be appoin ed hi d y

t the t t s u st of have aken liber y , on hi very q e ion

ri us t ut t t h t u t f L e e o e s o . Hono , m ila e in r c ion S for t he 28th o f u as has ? u t J ne , he done I have q o ed

the t s s the 1 5 20 above exac pa age of Breviary of , which runs thus In t his Synod were condemned “ us r us r us r us Cyr , Se gi , Hono i , Pyr h who aﬂirme d or preached one operation o r will in o ur ” L r sus s t ua e c onde mn ati o d Je Chri . In q Synod

su t rus r us us r us ui n Cy , Se gi , Honori , Py rh q u nam v e lunt at e m e t o pe ratio ne m in Domino Je su

r t dixe runt r n t h Ch is o vel prae di c ave u t . I open e

o f t o - da t r the Roman Breviary y, and he e I ﬁnd , in

t ru L e e u 28th t s ins ction of S . (J ne ) In hi Synod “ r u s r us r us we e condemned Cyr , Se gi , Py rh , who t l J ” admi t ed only one O peration o r wi l in esus Christ .

e o us r u s e t r us c onde m In Concilio Cyr , Se gi , Pyr h

at su t uuam t ant ummo do ve lunt at e m e t r n i n , ope a ” n m r r n t io e in Ch ist o p ae dic a t e s . The name of

Honoriu s has disappeared . They have Simply sup

r h f r t p e s s ed t e condemnation o Hono ius . Fa her

r r the t o his t the Liber Ga nie , in preface edi ion of

Diurnus s s t t t t t ay , wi h a g en le irony, ha hey “ s o t he s t : u t s t did for ake of brevi y N nc ali er i a, ” b re viu s ue le unt ur q g .

u s t he t r hi h u st Th ancien B eviary , w ch I ave j

u t s the s f the t s q o ed, give name o here ic condemned ' 30

the C u h . s t e s by VI o ncil , and deﬁne here y for which

' ' they were condemned Honorius is among st the

u r t o n mber . The Sc ibe who had correct t he Breviary

s t t the s t t doe away al oge her, for ake of brevi y, wi h t his t riﬂing incident of a P e pe condemned for heresy

( E ni u su f l by an cume cal Co ncil . Are ch a siﬁ c atio ns as t s t o t t ? i s s u is he e be olera ed Th , Mon eigne r , one

o f the r u s f a d which deceived yo u . Here are s ome

t rs the s s s w s t r t i t o he , of ame cla , al ay perpe a ed w h — the same int ent ion and t o at t ain the s ame end an

u undivided s premacy .

VIII . I have before me this same Roman Breviary o f the l 6th t u it the cen ry and in I read , on l 6 h t h u t st . u t e fea of S Marcel, Jan ary , long acco n of t u f t But he t o s . wonderf l mar yrdom hi holy Pope , in t he r r t t n o t refo med Brevia y , I ﬁnd an in erpola ion , a word of which the ancient Roman Breviarie s cont ain . It is as follo ws Saint Marcel wrot e a lett er t o the

s s of the t t u t he Bi hop province of An ioch , o ching

r o f: the u s s p imacy Roman Ch rch , which he how

h u oug ht t o be called the Head of t e Ch rche s .

t s it is l t t u In hi , moreover, dec ared ha no Co ncil

t the ut r t can be legally convoked, excep by a ho i y ” the a t f s t e ist olam of Rom n Pon i f. Scrip i p ad

E s e s t es rovinciae rimat u pi cop An iochen p , de p

R c s a u ut Ec cle siarum e oman e Eccle i e , q am Cap app ll

d m n t rat t illud sc rl t um e st e o . andum s Ubi e iam p ,

ul u u u c e le b rari s auc t o rit ate n l m Concili m j re , ni i ex i ” Romani Pontiﬁ c s . 3 1

t is t s tt t is Now, wha hi le er of which men ion made

is u t r t he 9th tu here ? It a doc men fo ged in cen ry , a l re t alﬁ It is t t ar s the fal se de c , hen , ow d beginning of the 1 7 th cent ury that t hey have int erpolated the

t tu r t r u s t he s t s ancien Li gy wi h f a d like fal e decre al , already su spect ed of being fals e by the great Cardinal

us t he 1 5 th t ur r t o su h de O a in cen y , p oved be c from

h the l 6th st s t t e middle of , and ca a ide hencefor h with indignation by Cardinal B aro nius . I do n o t int end t o maint ain t hat everyt hing t aken from the fals e decret als mu st nece ss arily be a doct rinal error ; b ut I maint ain that it is t e stimony

rr r s t ut tt bo owed f om fal ehood , and which , wi ho be er

rs the t r it su t s evidence , rende doc ine which ppor an

object of suspicion .

r t n th A s econd int e pola ion . O e feas t of S . Mar

c e llin r 2 6th the t , Ap il , ancien Roman Breviary of 1 5 20 conﬁnes i tself t o t he recital of the martyr dom

P e B ut is t of this pe . here ano her Roman Breviary of and another of in which t he odious and ridiculous fable o f the pret ended Council of

f‘ inue s a is int ro du e d S s c . at The Pope , S Marcellin , that Council had accus ed himself of offeri ng incense

t o s the r s s oe te rum idol , and Brevia y imply add , C a ” min da atus t ut n o e mn es . B t u t the , half a cen ry la er,

o f Sinue s sa as s : No fable expanded follow one ,

1 Hin schius . i . 2 2 3 an d ll n i . , v , p . fo ow g 2 ib l aint e - Ge n e ie e Num . . 70 . B S v v , B B 3 I i Num. 6 b 7 . d , B B l t - Héfé é His . de s Conc il . iii . e h. iii. O u the re t e n e n d , , v, , p d d Sy o of

Sinue s sa. 3 2

w dared t o b ut t n ho ever, condemn him , all wi h o e

o ut u u s u o n voice cried , J dg e yo r elf, by yo r w

ut b ut n o t our u t t h r mo h, by j dgmen ; for e ﬁ s t See ’ u can be j dged by no one . Qu em tamen damnare

ansus es t n emo s e d s una c lamarun t , omne voce ,

Tu e t e s t u u nam rima ore , non no ro j dicio , j dica ; p ’ i atur S edes a nemine ud c . u s t he us j Th famo , t u t t rima S edes a nemine ho g h now ri e , axiom , p

t s u udicatur is t s e . N j , aken from hi ab rd leg nd ow,

t t o o n e o f t s r u s t r t o wi h regard he e f a d , wi h egard the expunging a mo st import ant word in the an cient

R L tu r is u oman i rgy , Cardinal Bella mine bold eno gh t o s ay t hat the change w as made by t he inspiration 1 f t s t ins irati st i o Go d. on a o erior If hi doc rine of p p ,

t o the s s t r applied rehandling of book and hi o y , be

t t it s t t o the adop ed , who will preven applica ion h Gos pel They might act ually change t e Gospel .

Ye s t s the s s t IX. , he e are fal ehood by which hey

d W r t o think t o s erve Go . herefo e I am bold repeat my t ext H as Go d then nee d of yo ur fals e ” s t t ou t u fo r ? hood , ha y Speak decei f lly Him

Num uid indi e t D us st e ut Eo q g e mendacio ve r , pro lo quamini dole s ? This mode of Apolog etics without openne ss is one o f the caus es o f our relig io us decay fo r centu ri es

t A S as u t u h pas . s oon h man na re perceive s in t e

st the s st t t o r u t it Apo le malle race of craf d plici y,

1 ll min R s d is t de M nit ri c nt ra —R n d B e ar e a . Ve ne t s . e s s . a , p . Ep o o o o o po te rt iam re o sitione m p p .

d not it . s is t t s o believe in Thi why, more han o her , it t yo u may become s vic im . I mys elf w as long before I could believe in t his

t s o f ss - st apolog e ic ig norance, blindne , and half hone y , o r t s st s s t he w ra her di hone y , which de ire end , hich believes in the goodne ss of it s aim and it s truth b ut t o t t t s has u s t o t which , a ain hi end , reco r e decei , t o st t o t o s t o u ul t my ery, force , fal ehood , a fra d en

f H as o d t o s s s . O G i nven ion forg ed pa ag e nce more , need o f the se frau ds ?

s sa t s is t u n ot b ut Thi , I y, hi wha I co ld believe

s n o t t o t have I , perhap , been able be enligh ened by li t s as t s s s . st t fac he e per on have For in ance , an I a an

t t o s t s t t o G the prela e made my elf, wi h re pec alileo , ” r t : Ye s u u t s following decla a ion , ndo b edly , aid he ,

G li w as t his u s r s a leo rig h , and j dge knew pe hap

t t w as t t t had s the t u ha he righ , ha he di covered r e

s of st : b ut at t t t t s t o o law a ronomy , ha ime , hi dang erou s t ruth would have s candali s ed t he i t u . s s the s t fai hf l Thi rea on hey condemned him , ” t t It as t o s th t t and hey did righ . w my elf a he se

B ut —i n words were utt ered . what s it o t in print ? This is n o t the opinion of o ne only : read in t he 1 st o f the o f t st s hi ory Galileo Opinion hree apologi ,

’ t t t u r t s u who main ain ha pr dence di ec ed Pope Pa l V . 2 r the r and U ban VIII . and Roman cong egation s t o

the o f tur t he condemn , in name Holy Scrip e and

1 ’ M r in l . 2 2 e nri a t Gali ee 7 . Th. H , , p 1 It a e ars t at t he P e s n e e r s i ne the c n e mn ati n Galil e an d pp h op v g d o d o of o ,

t at the u e s t he l f ce are al ne r s i l f r it V. He nri h j dg of Ho y O ﬁ o e pons b e o . M rt in a , I bid. 3 5

t t s st t ru b ut s Ca holic fai h , a y em e indeed , Oppo ed t o t he received int erpret ation o f cert ain sacred t ” ext s .

t the t t — the Had , hen , Ca holic fai h had Word of God need of t his mon strou s impo st ure in a solemn

u t ? O o f tt t s j dgmen ye men li le fai h , of low mind ,

o f s rt s n o t ur u s mi erable hea , have yo c nning device become the scandal of s ouls ? The very day that

the s t u u the w grand cience of na re dawned pon orld, u i n t o t . ot s s y condemned Be a oni hed if men , before

r o u t o u ss t pa doning y , expec of y a confe ion , peni ence , u d u t r t an t u t . profo nd con i ion , repara ion for yo r fa l

n o t t rs t o o t he s su t Have o he , on ame bjec , dared

t o sa as rt s t s t t y, ce ain Engli h Ca holic have done , ha t he syst em o f Copernicus o r Galileo w as fals e in the

1 7th t u b ut t ru rt the 1 9th cen ry , e and o hodox in , for the simple reas on th at the Church now autho ris es it

But t s t t wha ervice , once more , do hey imagine hey

r t o t t o st are endering God, or wha g lory Chri , by the se impudent as sert ions

X i t u . Here s ano her fact which o g ht t o have

t u t n n s enlightened me s ill f r her . O o e occa ion it

as ut w , as ss r o f the my d y “ profe o and examiner

t o u s t o st u o ut t s s u Sorbonne , ca e be r ck of a he i pon

t he s t s t he s fal e decre al following remark , which a theolog ical candidat e s ubmitt ed t o the Faculty

a an odious raud w s the The ch rg e of f , hich , ince

1 6th tu has r e t o it ma cen ry , been f eely appli d , y unque stionably be removed from t he work o f the ' 3 6

and the t s t o ore , work i elf be proved

on the t it s ut as more par of a hor,

has t a ious raud Mohler already remarked , han p f ” fraus pia .

s . A econd remark All seemed lost . Then ari se s a canoni st no les s zealou s t han skilful and

e s t s s cl ver, invoke ancien and holy Pope , recall the us u s t t s as famo Co ncil of primi ive ime , and , the re no long er exist ed writ t en document s o f thes e

t t s o f t s l u s s ancien Fa her , he e ear y Co ncil , he forge su s u t ac t s s r s t o t s e r b eq en , which he a c ibe he e p so nag e s and t o the se ass emblies who s e names bore authority ; and his book produced more effect upon his agit at ed g eneration than all the . apo st ol ” ical decrees . “ A tt u st u ut s t o t t e the li le caref l dy p ﬂigh , h n , all

t t s t st n a ack which , for a long ime pa , have bee

t t s t t he s u - s s direc ed ei her ag ain p e do I idore him elf,

r hi ll t o ag ains t the doctrine s cont ained in s co ec ion . If he afﬁrm that his aim was t o offe r t o the — — public a us eful work which in reality he did b y st u t s st s t in recon r c ing eccle ia ical leg i la ion a manner, ” 0 ti t b ut s u at tt . ar ﬁcial we admi , o nd bo om “ the t s s u s t us : t o And he i concl de h Accordingly,

sum u t s the s t s p wha we have aid , fal e decre al ,

st s o t t t s n o t again which g rea an ag i a ion aro e , do 1 deserve all t he anathemas which a cert ain s chool

ha u ur st t u t s nceasing ly h led ag ain hem . Undo b edly

1 l r Un doub t e d y the lib e ral C at holic s are meant h e e . 3 7

the p seudo - Isidore was wrong as reg ards t he fact o f his suppositions b ut he may easily be j ustiﬁed

his t t s r t . s by in en ion , which we e excellen The fal e

t s r u t t s t the decre al b o g h in no innova ion , ei her in government o r dis cipline o f t he Church ; t hey simply st at ed the right and cu st om s in force at

r it is s s n o t t o every pe iod , and impo ible recog nize the happy inﬂuence which t hey exercised at that

h f h ur t e mo st disastrous epoch o t e Ch ch .

r t he u t t Re n on I p efer noble j dgmen of Fa her de y ,

r sa s as s : must who f ankly y follow Never, we

t has the r s s o admi , wo ld beheld a fal ehood

u us s o s s o s s o s r a dacio , immen e , olemn , per eve ing , l u h e t s u t u s so t ri u t . and , add, d ring cen rie mp an

Ye s the t hi h st t s . as , impo or a ained end He

as s the s the u changed , he wi hed , di cipline of Ch rch ;

b ut has n ot st the o d he ayed general decay . G

r s s s u s t neve ble e impo st re . The fal e decre als have ” 1 u u t b ut r never prod ced o gh ha m .

. o f the Liber Diurnus XI I have Spoken , which

t s the t s s o f f t the e con ain ancien Profe ion ai h of P pes . The hist ory o f this book is s till well ﬁtt ed t o enlighte n us upon the exist ence o f the Apolo etics o f dishone sty — g o r half good - faith that pois oned s ource o f o ur

r s t di s t h p e en vi ions . Read e account of the extra

f rt s at ordinary e fo , which were made Rome and

s the 1 7th C tu t o su r ss t s el ewhere , in en ry , pp e hi book,

1 — Fairies reli i euses o e mb er 1 86 l m r 6 . Se e a s e e g , N v , ( o Nov b , 3 8

so u t o s t it s u t which revealed m ch , and ay p blica ion . Why all thes e effort s ? Because they wi shed t o conceal from the world the P rofe ssion o f faith o f the

e s t u s st the da o f former P pe , who , for cen rie pa , on y t ss the t heir acce ion , renewed condemna ion of Hono

us—a t is ri condemna ion which , and ever will be , the t r st t o the t ri s e e nal ob acle doc ne of a per onal,

s ut s t t . ab ol e , epara e infallibili y

t Sirmon el s s ss r o f o f the u Fa her , po e o one man s t s o f the Liber Diurnus crip , and Cardinal Bona ,

o f the x s t t Referee Inde , imply avow heir mo ive . Father Sirmo n el writ es : The Profe s sion o f faith

o f the - t P st s t t newly elec ed ope amp wi h reproba ion ,

the t u r o f the u t he in ancien form la y Roman Ch rch , ” ” f u o s . It is t s s memory Honori hi rea on , he

s has t u s t s add , which de erred me from p bli hing hi

u s t the s t o form lary , in pi e of promi e which I made

t - u Cardinal Sain e S zanne . “ Cardinal Bona s ays : A S Pe pe Honorius is c o n de mne d in the Profession of faith of the ne w ” ff i i n u s r Ponti s t s better o t t o p blish thi wo k . Cum in Profes sione ﬁ dei ele c ti P o ntiﬁ cis damn e t ur ” 2 ri u Honori us Papa prae st at non divulg a op s . Father Sirmonel and Cardinal Bona Simply t hen

i i the t u s t of the u admit t . This s na ral de cen h man

one s misery which they follow . Each defend him

t hi s u s self as he can . Behold a fac w ch overwhelm it L e t u s prevent s being known .

1 14 . De Ro siere . Int r uc t i n to the Lib er Diwrnus . 1 od o , p

De Ro siere . I bid . 1 13 . , p 3 9

XII You se e it t t s t s and t s . , hen , by he e fac he e

s s for tu s st the s o f dissimu admis ion , cen rie pa chool

t de c e it ' and s u s t o su r s s la ion , , fal ehood endeavo r pp e

us t he t o o revealing hist ory of Pope Honori . They

ut t the vi t he a t m ila e Bre ary , ncien Roman Breviary,

the 7th t o the 1 6th t ur t which , from cen y, con ained

s e t t s t s d s ut the c o n de m in erm , in erm beyond i p e , nation o f Honorius as a monothelite heretic They su r ss the Liber Diurnus t s the s pp e , which con ain ame

t the s condemna ion . They impel , by all mean in t the s t s t s o heir power , mind of men in hi direc ion ; that n e w the popular hist orian s of the Councils sum up the hist ory of Honori us thus Sixth (Ecumenical

u l t r t o the o f the Co nci , wi h rega d which name holy Pope Honorius w as for a moment com ” promis ed .

Aft r t s t o t as e hi we come a veri able prodig y,

s : t he r the fﬁ s ro follow In Roman B eviary, in o ce p

c lero R omano t the st r o f t he u , hey give hi o y VI . Co ncil

Pe e t t ut t the and of p Aga ho , wi ho men ioning name

us t o f t t u s t o of Honori , or any hing ha which all de him

the at the fi f O o . t pen Breviary of ce S Ag a ho ,

J u r 14th ou r as ll s an a y , and y will ead fo ow “ Agatho s ent his legat es and tho s e of the Roman

u t o st t t t w o tt rs t o the Co ncil Con an inople , wi h le e

r r the s t he t t s Empe o , in which here y of mono heli e

w as r dl s u t ut lea ne y, o ndly , and leng hily ref ed, and in which the chief authors and followers of this

s — r us us u us us here y namely, Se g i , Cyr , Pa l , Pyrrh , 40

t he t s— and o her were condemned . He declared at

the s t ss t r s t t his r ame ime , in expre e m , ha p ede ce sse rs had al ways been free from every s t ain of

. B the ut h t t o f t error y a ori y , herefore , Sain

t he ( E u w as t . u l Aga ho VI c menical Co nci convoked , which condemned the s ame errors and the same ” s s t t t per on ha Aga ho had condemned . Agatho leg at e s sue s e t Co nc ilii Romani misit Const antino

olim c um s litt eris Im e rat o re m u us p , bini ad p , in q ib

rae dic t a haere si mon o the lit o rum t us p ( ) doc e, f e , ac

s re ﬁi t at a damn atis ue rimariis ll s s t olide , q p i in ec a

t o rib us— s t O e u Serg io cilice , yr , Pa lo , Pyrrho ,

t e t aliis— t ss s su e s b ni e rro ris Pe ro , an ece ore ab m labe immune s huc u sque fuiss e expres sis verbis

d l r it A th nis i t u u t o rit at e t e c a av . a o a c g , ig r, Sex a

us s s r t e st u a iide m Synod Univer ali cong ega a , in q ” ii mn nt errores de mque errant es da ati fue ru .

u is t the u t t S ch hen acco n , lying and in olerable , — — which is g iven us I know n ot by whom of the

hi t t u . r w as t r s ory of he VI . Co ncil Neve he e in

st m u u s s t hi ory a ore a dacio forgery, a more in olen i suppression o f the we ghtie st fact s . S uppo sing the Fathers o f the pre sent Council Should b e called upon t o vot e upon the qu e stion of

t r s ul e it u s Infallibili y , many , pe hap , wo d r ceive beca e t su u su ss heir Breviary , mming p a long cce ion of

u s st s s has fra d in a la and olemn fal ehood , deceived t u the t us hem pon fac of Pope Honori , condemned by

t he u as t . VI . Co ncil here ical

B u h s t t o Go d t will t e fal ehood be any advan ag e ,

' 42

t an u t t o h t u have o render acco n t e rib nal of Go d. _ Ab solut e cert ainty here is nece s sary ; fo r the smalles t

u t s t the s t do b here , demand , by divine rig h , mo A us . s s st rig oro forbearance for my elf, I believe mo ﬁrmly that I am writing this by the ordonnance o f

Go d o f our L sus st o f and ord Je Chri , and for love

i u t of H s Ch rch . The lowe s men may and do receive the n d s ordon ance of Go . Thi I have received in my

e s s t r a on , my con cience , and my fai h . To obey I am r t uff u eady o s er all t hat behove s me t o s ffer . G R M . THE O or O L BISH P R EANS ,

AND

GR ML E M THE AROHBISHO P O F A IN S .

SE C O N D L ETTER

MO N EI N EU R B E H A MP S G C S ,

A . G R A T R Y ,

' ’ ’ A e i c F n ai e P retre dc l Oratoire Membre de l ecd m ra s . , g

TRANSLATED FROM THE FRENCH BY

T J BAILEY B A . . , . . ,

P ri es t o the Church o E n land f f g ,

M F M - BY P R I IO O . DO UNIO L LI RAIRE DI UR E SS N , B E TE ,

29 RU E DE O U R O PARI , T N N, S .

LONDO N

J . T . H YES LY P CE. A , ALL LA S MP! M SH A ND c P T E ST E R w o . O R o I IN , AR ALL , , A RN .

IG N o W ! E G BR HTO . A LIN . It is un erstood t at t is ette r like all m d h h L , y o t e r orks sim l re re se nts the ini n the h w , p y p op o of aut or and oe s not in the h , d b d way. A A GR TRY, Prie st of the O rat ire o , Memb er of the Academy . P R S FEBRU RY SRD 1870. A I , A ,

W he n this S econd Le tte r w as on the po int o f making its a e aranc e I re c e e d b the n e s a e rs o f t s dat e the pp , iv , y w p p hi ,

r D h m m n m a re at a er o d L e tt e r o f M . e c a s ro s e g p , p i i g ply p i whe n the labo urs o f the Co un c il shall le ave him the le isu re t o ’ d s o The ords and t on e o f t e s e a e s e x t t o ards o . w h p g hibi w

m se no t n b ut o r e aran c e c ar t o o dn e s s . The o y lf hi g f b , h i y, g h ly

B s o de n s st to c a me his r e nd and doe s n o t t dra i h p ig ill ll f i , wi h w

i o d b ra se d fro m me h s affe c tion . G e p i

h Ar s o o f B ut as t o the t e o o i c a ue st o n M r . t e c , h l g l q i , g hbi h p

a n e s re mise s o n the ue st o n o f H ono r us a tri um ant M li p , q i i , ph

ﬁ n re u o n ve o nts c he d c at e s . ply p p i , whi h i i

W he e rm t me t o sa in m t urn t at he n ot ke e ill p i y, y , h will p t s ro mi se e c ause it is m o ss e to ke e it ? M S e c ond hi p , b i p ibl p y

Le tte r n c re ase I e e e the m o s s t —t at is t ere will i , b li v , i p ibili y h , if h

r d re o f m ss t a e e g e s i po ibili y .

r th Arc s o o f a n a o me t o c orr c t m W ill Mg . e hbi h p M li e s ll w e y e anin g u pon tw o p o int s in my Firs t Le t t e r

I r ma n e d fo r n n s n t M nn n w as n e ve i g i a si g le i ta t hat g r . Ma i g “ muni a d nd t re ally e xc om c ate d. I s i a I houg ht that if w e lo ok “ at the matte r te ra and st r c t w e s o u d arr e at t s li lly i ly, h l iv hi ” e xtraord n ar c onc us on t at M r ann n ou d b e i y l i , h g . M i g w l e xc ommun c ate as a n c ont rad c t e d the de c re e s o f t re e i , h vi g i h

n n (Ec ume ic al Co u c ils . I have ne ve r imag in e d myself t o have re c e ive d from Go d any “ m on I s a d t at the o t f n n sp e c ial issi . i h l we s o me may a d do I re c e ive o rde rs from G o d. n this s e ns e I have re c e ive d them a “ t ou sand t me s as w e all a e an d I a e re c e e d t e m in m h i , h v h v iv h y ” re aso n in m c n n n d i m t o sc e c e a n a . T s do e s n o t me an , y i , y f i h hi

t at orde rs ro m Go d c an b e w t out c e arne ss an d o rc e h f i h l f .

A . GRATRY,

P ries t o he r t r f t O a oi e.

SECOND LETTER TO MO NSEIGNEUR THE

ARCHBISHO P O F MALINES .

N I NE MO SE G UR, A fortnig ht aft er the appearance o f my First

L tt t t s u st s u e er, and a mon h af er ome jo rnali fo nd , by ’ h s at t s s u c ance , my proof my prin er , an ob c re

ss two s ri t s f ss expre ion and mi p n were , in all airne ,

t ut t o L tt t s has poin ed o me in my e er . All hi already

t t u s the t s been correc ed, and I h improve new edi ion . If any o ne Should do me the favour o f ﬁnding other

t t ult s s ul t o t more impor an fa , I ho d be happy correc t hem . A s t o the shrill and ﬁerce cries utt ered by part isans o n t s s s it is ust t o utt di s he e occa ion , my c om erly regard t hem .

n has But o e t . Ye s t objec ion moved me , hey

o r M r D h s a t o u s M s . e c am s and y me, y p ai e g p

the st t Manning in hig he erms . You Speak in

ou s t L tt t tu it o f y r Fir e er of grand in ellec al nobil y,

su t of t ss periori y in ellig ence and g oodne and ,

t s s the u s of the s uss o ne never hele , in co r e di c ion ,

s no t r i l n o f u s t t t doe pe ce ve , each yo r page , ha one

o f t s t u deep and ender re pec , which we ﬁnd in yo r di scourses every t ime that thes e reverend Fathers t ” are in que s ion . 6

t o t s u t t the I am compelled admi , Mon eig ne r , ha

s s t o f the u t has t nece i y arg men of en carried me away,

has n o t t t t o as t as and permi ed me renew, of en my

t s the f u ss s o s t . B t hear de ired , expre ion my re pec t s s is us I i n t u . t s o o hi , e pecially, my exc e y , Mon

r t s u t t . eig ne , wi h whom , in reali y , I am ﬁg h ing Undoubt edly I have replied t o a portion o f your L tt t h e er . I shall reply o all t e res t b ut what I am ﬁg hting ag ainst is that school of error o f which I — have Spoken a s chool which aspires n e w t o reign

t u ut t at st s wi h individ al a hori y, or which lea demand t o the t us s su t t o the be , like g rea religio order , bjec

ur s t o f the O —t t s l j i dic ion rdinary ha choo , in ﬁne ,

turi s st s t s which for cen e pa , and e pecially in hi

tu is the s r o f our us the s u cen ry, di g ace ca e and co rg e

f s i o r t is the o . s u s relig ion Thi enemy, hi enemy of the u st Ch rch , which I, like every Chri ian and

t t the t the ut every heolog ian , have bo h rig h and d y o f t s u i the t u o f comba ing , e pecially d r ng con in ance the Council .

t t t t e is s c ho ol w has I repea ha her a of error , hich led away holy men and noble minds and numbers of

s s is n ot the ffs of our t he faithful . Thi chool o pring

s s it is it t t s day , ince which , on cer ain poin , deceived

u s the genius and holiness o f Saint Thomas Aq ina .

his s as t rs s s s s In ca e , in o he , impa ioned , carele , and

us s t t t he audacio mind carried away wi h hem , by

o f ss t u t st s . force a er ion , reg la ed and mode mind

t s the s s Num uid indi e t Nex , liar in Biblical en e q g ” - Deus mendacio tuo ? appeared upon the scene .

rd o r the x t th is t 3 . The denial e plana ion of e h orical

t t o u u t fac s con rary t yo r arg men . tt In my First Le er I Spoke o nly o f the third point . My pre sent Lett er will ent er upon the consideration

o f the t t o o t t s econd . My objec will be ﬁnd u whe her

it is t u o r it is t u t t the t r o f r e, how r e ha doc ine “ pers onal infallibility po ssess es the Splendo ur o f a — positive t rut h a t ruth admitt ed by the g reat est t names in heolog y in all ag e s .

L t h M r e us follow t e order adopt ed by g . Manning in his Charg e upon the s ame subject ; le t u s beg in

t t o the from modern ime s and as cend early ag es .

s u t t t s ou I believe , Mon eig ne r, ha for modern ime y would accept as t heir repre s ent ative the great est

s t —the s e Can e o f name in heolog y name of M lchior ,

r L u . Bella mine and S . ig ori It is underst ood that I Shall speak neither o f

ssu t s o ne o f the t t s Bo e , him elf g rea heolog ical name

o f the t tu s s s ut la er cen rie , nor of Ger on , who e rep a t ion w as g reat enoug h for the Imitat ion t o be

t t ut t o him o f t hi s a rib ed , nor any hing w ch concern

the u s o f the noble and powerf l chool Sorbonne, nor

e who u the u st o f rs even of F nelon , , pon q e ion pe onal

t ut s t t he ut st infallibili y, ref e Bellarmine wi h mo

decision .

t the s o f n e L e t us t ake ﬁrs ca e Melchior Ca . In a chapt er upon the divine privilege s of the 1 o f t he t t s o f t Holy See and Pope in ma er Fai h ,

1 i he l i i i iv De L c s T o o c s . . . v 0 . . , o g Bk , 9

Cane u t s o n ut t t t Melchior q o e , comp a ion , wen y

s s s suﬂi cie ntl us the s o f pa age , y copio , bearing name But t f the st t u es . s the Pope s o ﬁr cen ri , of he e

~ t t ss s ut t ? wen y pa ag e , how many are a hen ic Two t t s t t the only . The eig h een o her are ex rac ed from

r fals e de c et als .

is b ut t ssu o f r s The whole a i e forg e ie , now

tt t o su o f the t t admi ed be ch , and which g rea heo h t le gian was t e vic im .

e nou h t o t s u thi s Now, be good g no ice , Mon eig ne r, It is no mere as s ertion which I have t o di sprove .

is t tt t t st a fac admi ed, a fac ob ained from hi ory , a

ut the st fact no long er di sp ed by anyone . From la

u hi r 1 9 t o u t r us . s tt 8 , , 7 cen y Pi “VI in le e of fo r t t s G tt the Me ropoli an of ermany, admi ed forg ery of

the decretals of the P seu do - I sidore in the se words

L e t us ut s t s t le t it u t p a ide hi collec ion , and be b rn , if ” m i n hu o u . S e e na us c olle c t o e m usmo di y will p j , m ” t t c onc re manda . ig ni e iam , Si place ,

Melchior Can e then regards as authentic all thes e

u t s are ﬁt t o u t he doc men , which only be b rn ; and put s int o the mouths of the t wenty Pope s whom he

u t s the s s o f the s u - s q o e , fal ehood P e do I idore

It is neces sary t o be aware that the re exist s at the

s t ss t s t of the pre en day a cla ical collec ion , de crip ive

t s the s u - s the t u decre al of P e do I idore , in which r e and fals e decret als are distingui shable at a glance by

t he t the t the form and ype of prin ing . Each of fals e

s t us is asse it s one , h laid bare , cl d in place and . 10

u . s ui t s n mbered The e g l y one are condemned, locked u 1 p, and can no long er do harm . at t t Now, every reader can verify once ha which t w e ss . L t h a er e him open t e chapt e r o f Melchior .

Can e De L is th i li oc l cis b . eo o . u s ( g , iv , co r de Mig ne) .

Le t him t the ss t of Hinschiu ake cla ical collec ion s , and verify the reference s which I am about t o g ive .

t u i S . Anacle s s charg ed with two false decretals

ss at s 74 8 cla ed pag e and 3 ; S . Evaristus c o n t ribut es the false decretal classed at pag e 84 ; Al h . as t t at 5 tu S exander ha pag e 3 ; S . Six s that at 1 0 8 . s s t o t he pag e The ame applie Popes S .

Ele uthe ru s u I . s . . t Z ri u s , S Pi , S Vic or, S . ephy n , u Eu u . s . s s . s S Marcell , S ebi , S Melchiade , S . Mark, D 2 l u . m . u s . a asus . S J i , S Felix, and S

This is no t all . Be sides thes e eig ht een forged

ss s tt ut t o the e s the st pa ag e , a rib ed P pe of ﬁr

turi s the autho r u t s the s t cen e , q o e , in ame chap er , f two tt s o . t s us o n e ss t o le er S A hana i , addre ed Pope h x t e t t . . s t o . o w S Mark , o her Pope S Feli The e

tt s are u t s le er forg ed doc men , proved apocryphal and ab surd in the edition o f the Benedictines o f “ ” t - u s t t s a Sain Ma r in We have he i a ed , y

- Decretales Ps eud Isidori a/noe et a itula An ilra/m/ni ar Paul Hinsc hius . o C p g , p

e x o fﬁ c in a e rnh ardi auc n it z aL e i siz 1 863 . B T h , p , 1 V ir ur aint le ut ere la a e 1 2 5 e t ur le s aut re s le s a e s 1 1 6 o po S E h p g , po p g ,

1 2 7 1 3 1 2 2 3 2 30 2 42 452 45 6 484 5 00 e t sui ant e s . , , , , , , , , , v 3 Am n st th a c al s s e s c c urs At an asius vol . ii . . 675 . e r a a S . h , , p o g po yph p g o hi l r P e Fe li The e it rs sa Hae simus ali uan do t s e t t e t o op x. d o y q “ ub ii an e de re mus n e ne has sane c o mme ntis e t me n dac iis d , o i n a n m ne ui in n st ra re s e rsae e x ue variis l c s c o s rc i at ae . Ve ru p , q o q d o e ditione le c t r ve l e x s uriis de side rare t isum e st e as de nue ub o p , v p 1 1

the t s u s t s t wo u t s edi or , in p bli hing he e doc men as being t o o full o f fables and falsehoods picked up

r t h B ut st t hi st he e and ere . , le any ng , even among

the ss s s u t o ur apocryphal pa age , ho ld be wan ing in

t t u t it t st t o u l s edi ion , we have ho gh righ ill p b i h

t . are r t s t all hem They only f ag men , g a hered from

rt s t t s tt s s o f pa , ex rac ed from ynodical le er , decree

u s st t t t r the Co ncil , and i ched oge her by a fo ger, who ,

tt r t o the s the e be e deceive reader, change p r per

s st ut s at his the s name , and di rib e will year and ” s the name of cons uls .

s is n t t s s t t o e t . Thi all y In hi ame chap er, wha

t s tt rs . t s us end in view have he e forged le e of S A hana i , and the forged reply o f the tw o Pope s ? To establish that the Council of Nicaea t aught t he Opinion main t aine d the ut —t t is t o sa the u t by a hor ha y, eq ivalen

' t o il t But th u ic aea is infallib i y . e Co ncil of N well

. f u t known Never had anyone heard o s ch a hing . Undoubtedly ; b ut the reas on is that up t o the 1 6th cent ury they did n o t know the Arabian Canons o f

a . t wo r tt o f t s us Nic ea The fo ged le ers S . A hana i u t t s h s . t t t e q o e he e Arabian Canon And for hwi h , in

1 6th t u t t - u s the u cen ry, wen y fo r Canon of Co ncil of

ic ae a tt di And t s . s N , wri en in Arabic , are covered he e new Canons afﬁrm the t hesis o f Melchior Cane and

Bellarmine . Do you se e the force of these com b ination s ?

lic are N on sun t is t ee ni s i ra me nt a e x ue ar us l c is e x f g , q v o , hi s t ri a t ri art it a e x mul tis s n o dalib u s e is t olis e t de c re tis n c ili o p , y p Co m ru . hinc in e e xc e r tee e t a alsari ui am c o n sarc in at ee ui ut o d p , f o q d , q fuc um le e nt ib us fac e re t n e mina e rsee e r ria immutavit annos g , p p p op , ” arb it rat a suo e t oonsule s adsc ri sit p . ' 1 2

But m s t . u con ider for a mo en The whole Ch rch ,

the u o f ae w - b t ever Since Co ncil Nic a , kne y heir

u o ne the t t s n mber, and each by name , wen y Canon deﬁned by this great Council . The Canon s o f the

u a ou t are as as Co ncil of Nic ea are c n ed, well known h t th t e s e G s . t t chap er of o pel There were wen y, and h 1 h n et on e . But t e 6t t u su more , in cen ry, ddenly

s u o f the ri t s re ro were di covered , in favo r g h and p g

' t s o f the b ut t t - u a ive Holy See, a o wen y fo r, which had remained unknown t o the Church and the world k u t t us s . as d ring more han a ho and year Now, I if common sense is not sufﬁcient here t o do j ustice t o su s t c riti ch a fable, which , moreover, cien iﬁc i m h c s as st so t t n o t s . de royed , ha a Sing le word remain 1 th ss t t f Héfélé u t s t See e di er a ion o pon hi Subjec . I still remember the day when this chapt er o f

Can e st u t it was Melchior ﬁr came nder my no ice, about ﬁft een years ago . All the se pas sag e s and the sacred authori ty of these tw t e s st a en y P pe , among whom I imag ined I he rd

A tus the s su ss o f . P t nacle , econd cce or S e er, and t his t t su s s s w t the hen o her immedia e cce or , ﬁlled me i h

t st s t At t t t deepe s a oni hmen . ha ime I only knew the s t s t u t of fal e decre al by name , and I never ho g h u t them in any way . I Sho ld never have dared o

n u t ! suspect Melchior Ca e of s ch an error . Wha

t o s the s su ss said I my elf, did econd cce or of i h s t . t us r t as t e e S . Pe er, S Anacle , w e already P pe o f the medi aeval peri od : Le t the more difﬁ cult

1 Héfélé Hi st oire des n ci les t . i . 41 . , Co , , 13

questions and the g reate r causes be referred t o the Aposto lical See ; for thus have the Apo stles them ” s elves appointe d by order of the Saviour ? Ditti cilio re S quaestiones e t majores c auses ad Sedem Apo st olic am re ferantur ; ' quoniam Apo st oli ho c st atuerunt jussione Salvat oris This same Pope “ wrot e t o the P atriarchs an d P rimates respecting the supremacy of the H—oly See over all the Churches and over all the ﬂock a privilege conferred upon

the R st u not the oman and Apo olic Ch rch , by ” 1 st s b t sus st s . Apo le , u even by Je Chri him elf

a sac ro sanc t a R e t A st li E s H ec omana po o ca ccle ia,

no n A o st olis s e d s D o t ab p , ab ip o omin Salva ore

st rimatum ob tinuit e t e minentiam ot e statis no ro, p , p ” . i a s s All s o f super un ve rs s Eccle ia . my idea hi st ory and ecclesiastical lit erature were upset ! I

u tt t s u st t ut s it t o t q i ed hi q e ion wi ho olving , en er upon another ; and it is only lately that I have t aken

u this t r . But so p chap e ag ain , when I did , I had

the t o f the t s before me collec ion forg ed decre al ,

t a . ss and every hing bec me clear Ble ed be Science , daught er of God ! which is able to pour the light

t t s t s t us the t ru t in o he e dep h , and h defend e Fai h ag ainst these sacrileg ious forgers .

u ns u is o f the t t s o f S ch , Mo eig ne r, one an eceden ’ the t heological question which ne w occupies men s mi s i o n h t nds . Thi s e of t e foundations o f that doc rine

‘ which you Say is acknowledged by the g reat est names t in heolog y in all ag e s .

1 Mel hi C e e s c r D L ci o s li . an The lo i ci b . vi ca . iv. o , o g , , p 1 4

. ll s u t s th II We , Mon eig ne r, Bellarmine ake e

s n L u th as Ca e . e s as ame line Melchior , S ig ori ame

1 ’ Bellarmine . Bellarmine 8 even less t ru stworthy t Cane us s n ot ss ss his han Melchior , beca e he doe po e

t s t s rit . It is who t s the ran paren ince y he admi , in

L t u t s s t u a osteriori i rg y, ho e chang e in rod ced p by

the t d But L u is n inspira ion o f Go . S . ig ori o more

t ust t t mi us his admir r wor hy han Bellar ne , beca e , in

u his t ss s n ot able cando r and g en le holine , he doe

t o f sus t u hink pec ing a fra d . There is n o need t o t ake the s ame cours e ag ain m L u t t t s t t o . here, wi h re pec Bellar ine and S ig ori , ha

t t hio an e I have already t aken with respec o Melc r C .

E ho i t so s veryone w s at all li erary can do for him elf. All our brethren in the prie sthood po sses s the Moral

f sult s o L u . Theolog y S . ig ori All can con , omewhere

o r t the w of De Romano o her, ork Bellarmine ,

P onti c e ﬁ .

For st the t in ance , I have before me chap er in 1 the ss s u t . t s s . L u q e ion , in S ig ori He collec all pa ag e

o f Can e o f Melchior and Bellarmine , and he main s t ains that the Pope is ab solut ely infallible . He begin

u t ss o f a us : All ust o f by q o ing a pa ag e S . Iren e m

s t u the u as nece si y depend pon Roman Ch rch , O s R their s ource and head . mne a omana

E s ss e st ut ende ant t u t ccle ia nece e p , anq am a fon e ” t t t s ss is u nt . e capi e . Now hi pa ag e a p re inve ion L u has us . . It is n o t t o be found in S . Irenae S ig ori

1 Ed Me llie r . Li u ri The olo ia Moral/is t . i . De In allibilitate Pct/ ee . . , S g o , g , , f p

. 109 e t sui p v .

" 1 6

t t fo r s t the con emp cience, by main aining forg ed

t s as t s s unt the o f the decre al a—heolog ical ba i , il end 18th tu t t is t o sa u t the cen ry ha y, n il period when u t Pi s VI . declared hat t hese document s were only

ﬁ t t o ur t be b n .

It is t t t u t s u st perfec ly clear ha , pon hi q e ion ,

Can e L . uo Melchior , Bellarmine , and S ig ri have

s t o b e ut t s at o r : t t cea ed a hori ie all , ra her hey are wi tn ss s t st the o t s t e e elling again d c rine , ince wi h t the tri s t su u o hem doc ne depend , in g rea mea re , p n

u ne u fra ds w nmasked .

Fo r u s u to t t be g ood eno g h , Mon eig ne r, ake in o

s t t t t o u t s ut s con idera ion ha , p rify he e a hor and make

‘ t ust ut t s o n t s o t it u not hem j a hori ie hi p in , wo ld be suﬂic ient Simply t o t ake out the false passag es which

t o u t s b ut it u stil b e are be fo nd in heir work , wo ld l

ss t o u t s the innume r nece ary follow p, in all heir pag e ,

e s u s o f t s s t s abl con eq ence he e fal e ma erial , and even ,

is t att st t o t the which a more delica e m er ill, rec ify fals e meaning spread around o n all Sides by thes e

u Is t s s ? It i has fra ds . hi pos ible s a poison which

t t t . ust on pene ra ed every hing Science can and m ,

t s t l t s ut h s . hi poin , cha leng e he e a or

t o t ou n e w s u t s And allow me ell y , Mon eig ne r, hi is the basis upon which you rely in oppo sing the

s o f O s as t u w ut o of Bi hop rlean , ho gh he ere an a h r

t the u t s error . Then, wi h all co r e y and g race which

t u s t s ou ever accompany bo h yo r word and ac ion , y

' propo se t o him t o retract You pre pose t o him t o

t t—he who s the t ut re rac declare Simple , palpable r h 1 7

— o u u u s t o su y who depend pon fra d , Shewn be ch for t wo centuries past

s t s t s s u ust In pre ence of he e fac , M—on eigne r, we m st w e are t if s s ﬁr , if children of ligh we are di ciple o f s t o t ss of the Him who aid, I am come bear wi ne t ut —we ust u we r h m , if only we are men of hono r,

ust u r u s wit s ust t m h rl far away f om h di g , wi h

t i t t s the s . horror, wi h ind gna ion , hi work of forger

’ ust t it t eclat t s t so t t We m rejec wi h , wi h olemni y ha , t u ut the s t o hro gho whole world, no one hall be able

' suspect in any of us the least mental res ervation o f maintaining any result of these miserable impost ures .

t s u a s . s III See, hen, Mon eig ne r, how, reg ard

t s the t st s t modern ime , grea e name in heolog y , in

r n n ll rm u i Ca e . L u yo opi on , Melchior , Be a ine , S ig ori,

t t su t t u t s s s all oge her ppor , in fac , yo r he i of per onal

lli lit B ut how ? u infa bi y . By depending chieﬂy pon t h ust e base s which we have j seen .

B ut le t u s s t o L u a cend mediaeval time . e t s s eek h —I t e st . s u s t t ma er mean S Thoma Aq ina , ha grand

us t t t s t . geni , ha grea ain

! u t s t u t u st Well pon hi par ic lar heological q e ion, upon the question of pontiﬁ c al sovereignty and in ll i t t s s t t o . s fa ibili y, hi wha happened S Thoma u Aq inas . He fell a victim t o the s econd great fundament al falsehood of which I spoke at the com m n m n e c e e t . i s is t n e w t t the Th a fac admi ed , like f h fact o t e forged decret als .

the 1 3 th tu t ss s A forger of cen ry inven ed pa ag e , B 18 which he assigns t o several Council s and several h t s s t o . s st t o Fa her , e pecially S Jo n Chry o om and

. Al . t s ssa s t s S Cyril of exandria By he e pa ge , hi

t st t . wre ch deceived ﬁr Pope Urban IV . , hen S

s u s I the s as t t e Thoma Aq ina , n ame way la ely ano h r has t ried t o deceive the Academy of Science s by

tt s o f i s t You forg ed le er Gal leo , Pa cal , and New on .

ust the ss t t o f t u ls the m read di er a ion Fa her de R be ,

D t o the t t t s ominican , preﬁxed rac , Con ra Errore

r o rum ust st u it . G ae c . I have j been dying The

ut s the t of . s ui s a hor defend good fai h S Thoma Aq na , which has no need of any defence b ut he admit s the t o f the falsiﬁ c atio n t t t fac s . He canno deny ha in the work o f the mast er are found quot ed the

s ss s the r t s . following fal e pa ag e from G eek Fa her , viz t u u t t of Al s . hree fra d len fragmen of S Cyril exandria , and t t s u t s ss t t o welve o her fal e doc men , a igned ei her the Councils of Cons tantinople and Chalcedon or t o

. s t r t S John Chry o s om and other G eek Fa hers .

Father de Rub eis admit s that S . Thomas w as deceived by thes e pass ages that he reg arded t hem as ut t t t use o f t t t s a hen ic ; ha he made hem, bo h in hi t r t t t s o f his w s b ut t t at the ac and hree o her ork ha ,

s hi s s s t o s r o r at clo e of life , he eem have di cove ed,

u s t th r u hi umma st s e . s S s s lea pec ed , f a d In , ay

s u t s t s he S . Thoma no longer q o e he e lying

ss s di t s uf t his t u t s pa age , in ca ing ﬁcien ly ho gh by ” t st de re he n sam aut this Silence . Silen io i o p ” l i m W e s t t fa s t at e t . al em olfac am indican e are ,

t o u s u and hen , y and I , Mon eigne r, more more com 1 9

elle d t o our s se e it the p believe , Since own eye , in

o f t s st u u exist ence decei , fal ehood , impo re , and fra d t in the s e great ques ions .

t it is t s t o f s u O nce more, hen, hi collec ion fal e doc ment s and fals e t raditions o f the Schoolmen which

w as . ou as . s u s deceived y , S Thoma Aq ina deceived f But it is neces sary t o insist upon the gravity o

r hi . s as s u the f aud w ch deceived S Thoma , al o pon the gravity o f the consequen ce s .

s rt Thesaurus A forger bring s t o Urban I V. a o of

Gree corum P atrum ss s u inve n , in which pa ag e of p re t ion are mingled with authentic extract s from the

r s tr t s s o f t Greek Fathe s . The e ex ac are ome hem

t t rs the ur s tt Selec ed , o he forged for p po e of comba ing the errors of t he Greeks with regard t o t he Holy

the o f t h . Spirit and right s e Papacy . Urban IV

h ri t e us t t o . hands man c p S . Thomas for examination

S . Thomas has n ot even a suspicion that anyone could invent and have t he t emerity t o pres ent t o t he

t t s r Pope lying ex rac f om Fathers and Councils .

t ss t s ss s sur s His Never hele , he e pa age pri e him .

t o r I s t us t repor t U ban V. begin h I have read wi h

r t tt t st t r the g ea a en ion , Mo Holy Fa he , book which

ou t ru it u s y en st ed t o me . In I fo nd many thing

u s ul t he o f o ur t But t it ef for defence fai h . I hink right t o say t hat the beneﬁt that may be drawn

it t s t s t t t from migh be dimini hed by hi fac , ha in thes e pas sages and autho rities are found things

u t u t s t o rr s do b f l , which migh give occa ion e or , 20

s ut s u ust us t di p e , and nj acc a ions This is the debut o f the t t Contra Errores reec rum rac , G o .

. s was t at st st s But S Thoma , hen , ﬁr a oni hed . n t a t . s imag ine y heolog ian wha ever, and S Thoma

s st u his u t ss s him elf, r g g ling , in cando r, wi h pa ag e

st s b ut s t o which a oni h him , which he believe come

. t Al r s s . from S Chry o om , S Cyril of exand ia, or even t s t u i s from ho e g rea early Co nc l which S . Greg ory the t h G t s as t e s t s . rea accep Go pel i elf S . Thomas does n o t dare t o reject that which s eems strang e t o

st s t o u t t o . him . He rive s bmi S John Chrys o st om

the u s H e s t the t tu and Co ncil . bend benea h in ellec al

H e t s his n violence exerted upon him . al er mind o

t t s ri t t t hi cer ain poin s . He end by w ing ha w ch t u t t o herwi s e he wo ld never have wri en . Thes e

rs e t t the erro g a foo ing in School, and come down

t o u even s .

L tt s u stu In my Third e er, Mon eig ne r, while dying your theolog ical argu ment an d the support which h f o u t e ss s o . s u s y receive from pa age S Thoma Aq ina , we Shall se e how o ne o f the consequences o f t hi s

u has t o ou s s fra d come down y , and now al o deceive

ou R t the y in your eply o Bishop of O rleans .

h it i . w t as s s t IV From ha been already aid , hen ,

t t s t u t s o n e the s u st clear ha ill, pon hi and ame q e ion

s ut s t s t it of ab ol e overeign y and per onal infallibili y,

Thomas is o f ab s ol ut e necessity t o challeng e S . and his u st at st s . chool We m challeng e him, lea , in

t o f his s s s the Summa o r at o hers work be ide , , all 2 1

t s at the st t s of his s even , very lea , in ho e work in h which he quot es and t ransmit s t he lies o f t e forger .

s sa is our ut the t ut Thi , I y, Simple d y, if we love r h

als and have a horror of f ehood .

You t sa s u t t can no longer, hen, y, Mon eigne r, ha , fo r t t s the ae s s ha which concern medi val period, no le “ t t s u u t ss ss s the han modern ime , yo r arg men po e e — Splendour o f a positive t ruth a trut h admitt ed

the t s by great e st names in heology in all ag e .

t t s the a Bo h in modern ime and in medi eval period , t he u s n e w t t an d the ut s fra d admi ed , a hor who

u t the ut t depend pon hem, form principal a hori y in

u o f t s u t—t t is t o sa the favo r hi arg men ha y, very great est presumption o f forg ery which it is po ssible t o Wh t o of the r imag ine . at are we s ay now ea ly

t u s t s tw o t u t s cen rie , when he e g rea f ndamen al fal e

s n o t st o ne of t is o f the 9th hood did exi , Since hem and the other o f t he 1 3 th century

s u ust sa t t the Well, Mon eig ne r, I m y ha , among

t s o f t ou n ot u u grea name heology, y have in yo r favo r

s n ut r t t o r L t the rst a i gle a ho i y, ei her Greek a in, in ﬁ

or six tur s not ut t ﬁve cen ie , and a Single Greek a hori y at t any ime what ever .

L e t u u s s dis c ss ﬁrst the Greek authoritie . The very learned Father Perrone endeavours t o bring 1 fo r t forward his thesis some Greek aut horities . He

t s as u su the us ss o f . a us men ion , al , famo pa age S Iren e , then a passage o f an o ld author whom he does n o t

1 P P e rr n D L cis he olo rt i se c t a . iv . . e e T i cis a . . c o , o g , p , p 22

‘ the s s is n ot t t name , and en e of which apparen ; hen t h t t e u O t t t o f . a hori y of rigen , nex ha S Cyril, whom

n o t u t L e t u t . he does q o e . s examine thes e aut hori ie s

r t t . r u O s t a s . t Fi , ha of S I en e Fa her Perrone nly t s t o en assan s n o t u t . refer him p , and doe q o e him

t u t o t he t o No w rn pas sag e referred . And ﬁrst of all we have already seen how

tm r L u r uo . u . a s t s s S ig o i , q g S I en e in hi ame book

t s s t s the d t s and hi ame chap er, make holy oc or peak “ thes e words : All must of nece s sity depend upon ” he ur t as t s u . Roman Ch ch , heir o rce and head

O s E s ss e st ut e n de ant mne a Romana ccle ia nece e p , ” 1 t u t e t t ~ . Ne w S . a us anq am a fon e capi e , Iren e never wrot e t hese words n or t heir complet e equiv l n a e t .

s s t o t the u of t s us Be ide , apprecia e val e hi famo

f us it u t t h s s o . a o t at t e pa age S Iren e , o gh be known h Roman B reviary sums up the doct ri ne o f this holy doct or o n t his subject in a manner alt ogether incor f h t as s s e e . s t o t e t rec , we hall And, ﬁr all, doc rine is as follows The Lord o f all g ave t o His Apo stle s the power

the G s t u s of o pel, hro gh whom al o we have known

the t ut —t t is the t t he Go d r h ha , doc rine of Son of ;

t o s t he r t t r t o u whom al o Lo d Said , he ha hea e h y

r t t t s s t o u s s t hea e h Me , and he ha de pi e h y de pi e h t t t ’ Me and Him ha s en Me . We have learned the plan o f o ur salvation from none others than

De Infallib ilit at e Pa ae li i p , b . .

s t o it r the ost s the t h come f om Ap le , and fai h whic it s t u proclaim o men . By which we p t t o con us t s W t f ion all ho e who, in any way ha ever, from

o r b ss or s t vaing lory , from lindne , from perver i y

af t t t u t n o t t f ﬁrm ha which hey o g h o a ﬁrm . ” F r o s s . a us it is tt of ss t , ay S Iren e , a ma er nece i y

t t u s u t t s u ha every Ch rch ho ld ag ree wi h hi Ch rch , o n acc ount of it s eminent p ri macy ( son eminente 1 rimauté —t t is the t u s p ) ha , fai hf l everywhere , ina much as in it the apo st oli cal t radition has been pres erved continuou sly by thos e who exist every

r E le iam t i e m whe e . Ad hanc enim c c s prop er pot or prin c ipalit at e m necess e e st o mn e m convenire

Ec cle siam ho c e st e o s ui su t un di ue ﬁ dele s , q n q , in

ua s his ui su t un di ue s t q emper ab , q n q con erva a 2 st u li di It i n ot e a e st a o st o s t t . s ea q e ab p ra io ,

t ss t o s s t he t ut hen , nece ary eek el ewhere r h , Since “ it is s u in the Church the A ostles ea ily fo nd , p having

o the Church t made f a rich bank, in which hey have amas sed all the t reasure s o f t ruth ; s o t hat every

s e the t o f man , who o ver will , can draw from her wa er

di ut u s t t o life . That if a sp e Sho ld ari e rela ive

1 O n t his dif cult b ut im rt ant e re ssi n otiorem rwi ci/ al/itatem ( ﬁ po xp o , p p p , hic h Fat he r G rat r re n e rs eminent e ri mauté I add t he aluab le n ot e w y d p , v

t he re se nt is Lin c ln Dr r sw rth i e n in c a . xii . of p B hop of o ( . Wo d o ) , g v h p , ” h me H n l ur R . e t ra s ate s . 2 00 his S t . Hi l t us an d t he c p , of ppo y Ch of o t he e re ssi n reat er an ti ui t an d sa s Prin ci al/was in t he old xp o g q y , y , p , L at in e rs i n Ire n ae us as t ie re n has s e n is u se in t he same v o of ( S h w ) , d

s e n s e as in e rt ullian for ri rit t ime se e . Ire n . . 1 4 . T p o y of ( S , v , v s e t t r tas The ri inal r s us e b Ire nae us an d is O ppo d o p os e iori . o g wo d d y e re r b ab l ixa vwré av d a co ra In thi s same c ha t e r t he w p o y p px m . p , - m . The hurc L at in t ran slat or has re n de re d hea ven a mb y p ot en t/is si a C h of Rome w as t he only Churc h in the w e st t hat w as kn own to ha ve b een ‘ o wnded b A stles . It had t e re re a ot e nt ior rinci alit as a f y p o , h fo , p p p , ’ - m r rimiti ene ss t e b t he ranslat r. o e aug ust p v . No y T o 2 nt ra H ee re se s ca iii. n . 1 e t 2 . Co , p. , 25

f t t sh u we not a u s adet ail o radi ion , o ld h ve reco r e t o the mos t anci ent Churches ( nonne op orteret in

n uissimas re curre re s s in uibus A os toli a tiq Eccle ia , q p

nversati sunt I the st s t s s co ) , n which Apo le hem elve

r t di t t have lived, and lea n from hem imme a ely wha “ ” 1 is cert ain and clear upon the question

The reader has here before him the whole doctrine

t ri i f a u s u t s su t . s s o S . Iren e pon hi bjec Thi doc ne

t It is st t he s as t t o f pe rfec ly clear . almo ame ha

e tu who s s R un the st T r llian , ay over apo olic

ur s are u the rs o f the Ch che , in which fo nd chai

st s u are s t the s s who Apo le , pon which ea ed Bi hop

su t st t cceeded hem , in which are ill read heir

ut t t te s the a hen ic le r , each echoing voice and

r t th it ut I epresen ing e face of s a hor . S Achaia

r t rt h nea t o thee ? Thou has Corinth . A t ou near Macedonia Thou hast Philippi t hou hast

the s s o s . t u st t t s The al nian If ho can ravel in o A ia,

t u u t u art st s s . t o t t u ho ha Ephe If ho near I aly, ho

st s t d t ha Rome , where we can ﬁnd al o ra i ional ” ut r t authorit at hand L at . Pe rc urre a ho i y ( y , )

s s a o st olic as u u s i sae t ae Eccle ia p , ap d q a p ca hedr

A o st olorum su s s rae side ntur u u s p i loci p , ap d q a

i sae authentic ae t a e orum re c it ant ur s t s p li er e , onan e

vo c e m e t re rae se nt ant e s facie m un us c u u ue p i j sq .

e st t ? s Co rinthum Proxime ibi Achaia Habe .

n o n e s s li e s Si longe a Macedonia, habe Phi pp ,

The al i s ss on c e n se s . t s s t habe Si po e in A iam endere ,

1 Ib i c a i 11 i . . v. d , p , . 2 6

“

s E he sum. ute t as ad ac e s i habe p Si a m I ali j , Roman , ” 1 u d s ue u u t ri t s a t e n e nobi q q e a c o a pr es o st .

It is the t . u u st It is t t f doc rine of S A g ine . ha o u u t A I . he t l ur s os o ic h ches . s Pope Pelag i , pon p C Thi

s . u ust o n the su t t s Pope , prai ing S A g ine bjec of hi s t ss s s as s u the ame doc rine, expre e him elf follow pon cause o f s chisms This is the reas on why they are s s t t chi ma ical . Tha which divides t hem is n o t so ( u t f o f u t as t m ch heir di ference j dgmen , a cer ain

u o f u an d t dis vag e fear an nknown evil , a cer ain

t u st t r th r wi h rega d t o e Apo st olic S e e . The real

ss o f s u it s as . u ust s e ence chi m , S A g ine deno nce ,

is as s : s s hi s follow He who ra hly pledg e . m elf against the aut hority o f tho s e Churche s (illarum

Ecclesiarum t u t t t o ) , which have been ho g h wor hy receive Profes sions o f faith and apost olical epi stles

a ostolicas des ac e istolas t t t ( p ﬁ p ) , ha man canno call

s x r him elf e empt from the t e rible crime of s chism .

s u t t u the ur as Con eq en ly hey wo ld be Ch ch ; and ,

t n o t t wo u s u the here are Ch rche , we Sho ld be

s s t s or s i it be certain on the other chi ma ic , el e , f ,

hand that the true Church is in the A ostolic S ees , p ,

it is o ur s s u t adver arie who avoid ni y, who avoid ”

uni is t o u u t . comm on, which only be fo nd in ni y

Id sum s e st t u s s p enim magi , prop er q od chi

t su t ui e o s s se ntie n di ud u ma ici n ; q non diver a j ici m ,

se d ua u se t s t ame n t q edam ap d dela a , ibi incog ni a

met uent e s et contra A ostolicam S edem temere , p

1 e rt ullian De Praescri t ione adversus Hoeret/icos c . i . T , p , xxxv 2 7

u s s credentes pessima divi sit Opinio . Q od chi ma

' S pe cialit e r ess e beatus denunciat ' Aug ustinus dicens dc talibus Qui adversum auc t o rit at e m illarum

Ec cle siarum ua a o st olic as ﬁ de s e t e ist olas , q e p p

ac ci e re me rue runt t di t immanis simum p , emere cre ,

ul t ri t s chismatis crimen a se prop s are non p o e . Ad

summam aut lle s Ec cle siam ss c re ditis e t c um , i e e ,

ues s a ss n on o s sint n o s u s t d Eccle i e e e p , , q od ab i , s chismatic o s judic ab itis aut si verum in Apo st ol

icis S e dib us esse constat Ec cle siam e t e s , ill ab

unit at e di s e s c o no scit e e t c ommuni o ms uees vi g , q

tio ne m s s sub lat am u ve ram s unit ate e e , q am ni i in ” 1 st t ss ss con a e e non po e .

o w the su s u as s the N , Roman Breviary m p follow

t r o f a us s the s as doc ine Iren e , who hold ame Opinion “

e e us . u ust : the t P p Pelag i I . and S A g ine In hird book o f heresies (writ t en about the man of

st u t t s s s who s God, in r c ed by wi ne e had been di ci

s the st s s r and t ple of Apo le , bear a g and mag niﬁcen t e st imony concerning the Roman Church and t he

su ss o f it s s s the aith ul er etual cce ion Bi hop , f f , p p ,

and most c ertain uardian o divine traditi n It i g f o . s

t o t s u s s s of it s - hi Ch rch , ay he , by rea on pre emi

t ut t ro ter otiorem rinci alitatem nen a hori y (p p p p p ) ,

t t the u ust —t t is the ha whole Ch rch m conform ha , ”

t u . t t li De i fai hf l everywhere In er io bro , vir ab iis e doct us que s auditores constat fuis se Apos

t olo rum mi s t u rae clarum , grave in pri a q e p de

1 L ab b e Concil t . v 806 , . , p . . 2 8

R Ec cle S1a u li s E isc O orum omana , deq e il n p p suc

ss divinae t raditionis ﬁ deli tu ce ione , , perpe a, cer m u dixi t tissi a st . t u t c ode A q e ad hanc, dixi ,

Ec cle siam ro t e r otiore m alit at e m , p p p princip neces s e

e st omn e m Ec cle siam e st e o s ui convenire , hoc q ” 1 su t un di u ﬁ de le n q e s .

We s e e that the Roman Breviary present s us with ff t t t f r t o a us . a us a di e en doc rine from ha Iren e Iren e ,

u Au ust P e e P el l t . a us I . like Ter llian , S g ine , p g , like

the t s ri st s o f t t t t t all doc or and Ch ian ha ime , al og e her ig nores t hat exclusive and ab solut e privileg e o f the i th R u . ut t s e st s oman Ch rch The a hori y in Apo le ,

u d t B ut th an din the Churche s fo n ed by hem . e

ut t is the st u s chief a hori y in apo olic Ch rche , properly — th t B ut so t s e s s . called ho e in which Apo le lived ,

st t he o st u s t is t he among ap olic Ch rche , here very t t u u ancien and very grea Roman Ch rch, fo nded by i B ut u ul L t t o t . t . . s st S . Pe er and S Pa i en why m we listen t o it ? Because the suc c e S S1o n o f it s

s s as the t st u s is Bi hop , in o her apo olic Ch rche , a

f t u tu t u o f di ai hf l , perpe al , and cer ain g ardian vine tr dit t raditionis ﬁ deli tu c e rtissima a ion , perpe a, ” s s t n t tho e f c ust ode . The e la words are o s o

Ire nmus b ut sum u his t u the S . , p doc rine pon i hu ut t o f the a ostol c C rches . the a hori y p Now,

s t t o the u Breviary applie hem Roman Ch rch alone . But is t not u the R u here , in favo r of oman Ch rch ,

t r as n t o . ano he re on , accordi g S Here

1 Bre viaire Re main c e de aint Irenee le on . . Ofﬁ S , q 29

t s l . a us the Breviary adds the passag e i e f of S Iren e , b ut does not quot e it quit e fully . Ad hanc enim

le iam ro t e r otiore m rinci alit at e m n e c e sse Ec c s , p p p p p ,

ne m Ec cle siam ho c e st e o s ui e st o m convenire , q ” u ﬁ de le s is n ot s d. sunt undiq e s . The phra e ﬁni he

s not u t the of the s The Breviary doe q o e end phra e, and put s a full st e p inst ead o f the se import ant words

ua s hi s ui su t un di ue s t In q emper ab , q n q con erva a ” li dit hi s e st ea quas e st ab Apo st o s t ra io . T u is al s s the Ch rch , in which way pre erved, by

t u t u ut the the t u t di t fai hf l hro g ho world , r e ra ion ” f h t It is s t t the o f o t e Apo s les . aid ha meaning this ending is ob scure ; b ut is the meaning o f the beginning less s o Does n ot this e ndin g seem t o

t t t the us is us t o indica e ha idea of S . Irenae analog o

f z i nz t o t t o . G of Na a um s s s ha S reg ory , who ay ome

or t st t l the o f the where o her, Con an inop e , eye

the t the st the st world, bond be ween we and ea , hither from all Sides everything g reat hast ens and

e t s t r it t o o t s t s o ut m e here ; f om , , every hing e and

s t s as it r the u Spread i elf, were f om common Empori m ’ 1 the t Ci) du b e 'n' o o v O 1 r ew Of Fai h ( ? u pi kO t VO 7 39 wio r s) .

t r f az anz um th n e w t t . o e Admi ha if S Greg o y N ,

t s t s s st heolog ian , had poken he e word of Rome, in ead

of i t t o st t t ul apply ng hem Con an inople , hey wo d have become o ne o f the gran d theological bases o f infall i ilit b y.

s the su u In every ca e , Roman Breviary , mming p

1 Mi — Ed. ne . re . de Naz ian e u 4 ( m let Paris c t . 70. v res C es g , S G g , . , p . o p , , 1 778 , i. 7 55 . 3 0

t he t o f . a us t s t t i s doc rine S Iren e , ake ha which

u t o the R r u t t s all favo rable oman a g men , and omi h t t e st . es s . a us at re The h i of S Iren e , placed the t o f the ss t t is t s : commencemen di er a ion , hi We must b ring back the heretics t o the t radition of “ the st s t e su ss s is Apo le , which , by h ir cce or , pre

i the u s r di i n s erved n Ch rche . Ad eam t a t o e m

ua e st A o st oli s uae suc c e s sione s s q e ab p , q per pre ” m l n u d b yt e ro ru in Ec c e s s c st o itur. This t hesis i t e t th i s a e . t s u t repea d end When here any do b , we must have recours e t o the ancient Churches

nti ui ima E i s re urr r in a q ss s ccles a c e e .

From this formal t hesis o f an appeal to the

A ostolic Churches the u s the p , Roman Breviary ded ce

us t o the u o f R t ut excl ive appeal Ch rch ome , wi ho

t at all o f the t st ur s any men ion o her apo olic Ch che ,

h aeu t di o r t e reason which S . Iren s g ives why ra tion is bet t er preserved at Rome .

s s u out o f t he G ut Thi , Mon eig ne r, all reek a hor

t i the st st u o f u t s s s s . i ie , ronge in favo r yo r he i Does it indeed favour it ? IS it no t even contrary t o it ? O r t o sa the st is it n o t t r , y lea , en i ely different W hat I se e clearly is the doct rine o f the

the I t s s t primacy of Holy See , n he e word Prop er l m ” i n i a it at e . s t potio re m pri c p Th we all admi .

L e t us n e w t u our stu of the t V . con in e dy o her

Greek authorities adduced by Father Perrone .

Al ri is the ut t o f . There a hori y S Cyril of exand a,

3 2

t o the u no t the s t o f s a d Savio r, by in pira ion ﬂe h n

b ut the t dl our t s blood, by ligh kin ed in hear by our nl t t u s s t t heave y Fa her, we become hen o r elve ha

t i s is ss which Pe er h m elf , and ble ed like him

te it is t o u s t t the We become Pe r, and ha Word says Thou art Pet er and the remainder o f t ho s e

E di s o f st i t t R words . very ciple Chri s ha ock on who st a n d u which all follow Chri may feed , pon each o f these it is that every ecclesiastical dogma is founded . B ut if you wish to imagine that God built His

Church onl u on this P e ter alone what will ou y p , y sa o J ohn S on o Thunder and o each o the y f , f , f f other A ostles ou t t o s a t t p Will y , hen , dare y ha the t s of s al n ot st t g a e hell h l prevail ag ain Pe er, b ut t hat they shall prevail bot h ag ainst the o the r

st s st t s t s ? Is it n o t t Apo le and ag ain o her ain , hen ,

all t t t s s u in and each ha he e word are f lﬁlled , The ’ t s o f s n o t a st it t s g a e hell hall prevail ag in , and hi

t t s u u o her, Upon hi rock will I b ild My Ch rch W as it to P eter alone that God g ave the keys of the

kin dom o heaven n o t the t e ss g f , and do all o her bl ed

s s s ss t t t s t is one po e hem If, hen , hi gif common

t o th n ot the st s o f t t em all, will re al o ha which was said t o Pet er be common t o them all also ?

Ye s all t t was s t o t was s t o t o , ha aid Pe er aid all ,

t s ss sus t t all ho e who confe Je Chris as Pe er did .

‘ ’ s u ll t he t , art t , a To hem he aid Tho Pe er and ‘

st t o the the t s of s re , even end and g a e hell hall ’ ‘ n ot t it is the it Is it prevail ag ains . Who 33

the u the C u is u t or is it Roc k pon which h rch b il ,

t o the Church herself ? There are w meanings . Mig ht it n ot be that the Rock and the Church are the s ame thing ? This is my opinion ; and I affirm that t he g at es of hell shall pre vail neither against the Church nor ag ainst the Rock upon which Jesus Christ builds the

Churc

I do n ot di scuss in any way this doctrine of O rigen .

mi t f t t it is O rig en was oft en s aken . I a ﬁrm only ha t he contrary thesis t o that of personal Infalli

b ilit . t us . y, and every privileg e for S Pe er excl ively

' It is in fac t the the t u o f , , denial of doc rine in favo r that for which they appeal t o it .

Yo u see s u t as VI . , Mon eig ne r, how, in propor ion

s t o the t u s t he o f t he we a cend early cen rie , evidence

t s t the t D t s t he grea name in heology, g rea oc or , and early Fathers becomes le ss clear and less favourable u t t o yo ur arg men . No t being able t o find any trace s of a doctrine in t he t s o f the st tur s Greek Fa her fir five cen ie , finding at the s t the t t r t o r ame ime direc ly con ra y doc rine , , t o s a the s t ff t is n o t t t y lea , very di eren , ha alone sufli cie nt t o destroy this doctrine ?

B ut s it t t t ut t s how doe happen ha hey ﬁnd a hori ie ,

v L t s n o t ur t rs e en a in one , in favo of Infallibili y, pe onal o r s t t no t the imper onal , of which hey hen had s t st sus b ut ur the lig h e picion, Simply in favo of Holy t o t s t t See , and bring ing lig h ome preroga ive o her e 3 4

t the W the st of the A st l han primacy , hich re po o ic See s did not po sse ss ?

u two t ss s s They depend pon or hree pa ag e , alway h t e s s t u . aeus and ame one , no ably pon S Iren

u t . u . us . ae s . S A g ine They make S Iren , like S Lig uori say : O mnes a Romana Ecclesia necesse ” “ e st ut e nde ant t u t e t t p , anq am a fon e capi e . All

ust o f s s t u the R u m nece i y depend pon oman Ch rch , 0 — as their source and head words which Irenaeus

utt O r s s u t ss t o never ered . el e , Mon eig ne r , hey a ig n

Au ust t t s as ou u tt t o S . g ine ha aying , y do in yo r le er “ the s o f O s : lo cut a e st us Bi hop rlean Roma , ca a ” ﬁ nit t It is t t t t s o ul a e s . cer ain ha hi f rm a of

u u st s s s s t s S . A g ine po s e es ome hing deci ive and ab so

ut ut it li . I t t s s . l e abo , ke an axiom ay every hing

R has s th u R has e s is . ome poken , ca e decided ome i th u s s e st is s . Spoken ; all aid, re of no con eq ence

But the t t o t s i t t ust s . u objec ion hi , ha S A g ine never t t i th f u u t s t a . s e ss o . s aid ha all Here pa ag e S A g ine ,

as fo r s l the r the in which , my e f, I ﬁnd p imacy of Holy

‘ — t s is the t s s it is See and hi objec of my wi he , for

t —b ut n ot t s s wha we all believe I do ﬁnd hi aying ,

t the ss t t t t o him nei her a er ion , even implied , ha alone the u t o f is r t i as the u j dgmen Rome eve y h ng , form la ” i l ut st u s ﬁ nit a e st ss s t : R o c a e . expre e oma , ca a “ s is the ss : t s us Thi pa age Already , in hi ca e , have

tw o u s s t t r t s t o the st Co ncil en hei Ac Apo olic See , t t u us and t he re scrip s have been re rned . The ca e ” i us duo s . decided Jam enim , de hac ca a , Con

i s s su t A o st olic am cil a mi a n ad Sedem p , inde 85

ri t a e ne runt us ﬁ ni ta e st . etiam re sc p v . Ca a To

the t k n s s s which if o her well now pa ag e be added , we

the tr Au u st hi is have whole doc ine of S . g ine , w ch t t s su t r s s the s ha of Bo e , who eve ywhere ay ame 1 thi r are the ss s D t ng . He e pa age . The holy oc or sa s t o us It is s for u s n ot s t o r y afe , ra hly haza d

i t at st t any Opinion wh ch , accep ed ﬁr in a priva e

u has not t s t Co ncil , af erward been comple ed by a

u b ut t o fﬁr th ull plenary Co ncil , a m , wi f conﬁdence

u t t u r the r t o f and alo d , ha which , nde gove nmen

our L su s r st our L our Go d has ord Je Ch i , ord and , been conﬁrmed by t he consent o f the Universal ” u s t utum e st Ch rch . Sed nobi , in ea non pro g re di aliqua t e me rit at e sent entia qu ae nullo in

Catholic o l ili c ae t a ul r regiona i Conc o p , n lo plena io

t rmi t su t ut ﬁ duc ia se c uree vo c is e na a n , id a em asse re re quod in g ub e rnatione Domini Dei no stri

Salvat oris J e su st rs li s s as , Chri i, Unive a Eccle i con ” 2 se n sione ro ratum e t b o s . “ u t S . A gu s ine says t o u s again : We should n ot

t o fﬁ r t s t s r n ot su t dare a m he e hing , we e we ppor ed

the un anirnou s ut r t the rs ur by a ho i y of Unive al Ch ch .

whic h without u t r s . To , any do b , he him elf (S Cyp ian)

ul if at t t t the t ut th wo d have yielded , , ha ime , r h wi

r t o t s u st r u t t o li t rega d hi q e ion had been b o gh gh , t ” s s r s u . e abli hed , decla ed by an Univer al Co ncil Ne c n o s ipsi t ale aliqui d aude re mus asse re re nisi

Unive rsee s as c on c ordi s im u t orit at e ﬁ rmati Eccle i s aa c .

Au u s tin xxn . ermo c . m S éd. Gau e t . Pars ri r 93 0 S g , , , . v p o , p .

De a t . c nt r D n t i t li ii a o a s as b . n 1 2 E . v . 0 d Gaume t . IV. . . 3 30 . B p o , , , , p . 3 6

011i e t s C rianus s u c e deret ip e ( yp ) , ine d bio , Si jam illo tempore que stio nis hujus verit as e liquat a e t ” 1 de clarat a u um olidar tur per Plenari m Concili s e . Do su ch passag es as the se leave any room for the

t r of s ll l t ? t doc ine per onal Infa ibi i y In g ood fai h , read ag ain before God the deci sive words o f u u t k u . s as s t t he t D t S A g ine , and yo r elf wha grea oc or t u t o f s lli t . thi s t st ho gh per onal Infa bili y . Try e ,

i t o the il pray ng God wh e . This is howour g reat and gloriou s Fathers of the 5th century Speak t o u s o f t he Council s and the su ut ri t of the u It is t us t t preme a ho y Ch rch . h ha t u t t o of hey o g h be Spoken .

uff r s u t o t o ou of the S e me , Mon eig ne r , complain y number of false pa ssag e s put int o circulation by the ignorance and audacity of this school o f error with t which I con end .

e t s F nelon w as well aware of thi s . No hing wi e ” s t All t t s s . plea e hem , aid he modera ion hey

t t t is t o o r st r us hold in con emp . No hing p epo e o

t t t t t N t is t o o and ex ravag an o deligh hem . o hing dif ﬁcult for their audacity t o maint ain . I dread them for the Church more than the sect s of t he ” 2 t But e did n ot e t tt ut t o here ics . F nelon y a rib e t the t o f s s s s nt t s hem habi fal e pa ag e , i erpola ion , ut t and m ila ions .

i i u n . 1 84 . Ib i t . x l v 5 d , . , . . , . , p

n e m e rata uae ue as e rnantur. i il e st S ob rii sape re n olu t . T p q q p N h “ illi n arride at i il e st arduum u ab n orme ac de vium quod s on . N h q od n Ho s s ane lus uam hae re t ic o rum se c tas c cle s ias t ue ri n o n aude a t . p q E ” — me t n De Swmmi Pontzf. Auctoritate Dissert atio . o. ( l ) 3 7

W t ut t o u t tt ut t o ha I am now abo q o e , I a rib e no ’ u t t ut r on s s s . s e . I pec no one good fai h The a ho who se name s I gi ve may have been deceived by

r the in f ss in att n t rs o ss o . e o he by bl dne pa ion Now , u i t is not . s s ion a fra d Be de , I declare , and I believe

r t t t s L tt s I have already decla ed , ha , in he e e er , I

u s s r u tw o of s only acc e of fal ehood and f a d men , who e

t th - s . e s u s name I am ignoran , viz , P e do I idore and

r o f th The auru the autho e Greek s s .

H r t is t D t e e , hen , a German heolog ian , oc or

W r s has u st t r s t t eninge , who e book j been an la ed in o

r in t o the t r f u o . us French . Refe r g Commen a y S A g

t u the r s o f the ur ue su t s ine pon wo d Savio , Q e n ove

me ee vo c e m au diunt u t s the ss meam , he q o e pa ag e o f the holy Doctor as follows : Vow ej us (Chri sti) ” 1 a u u e t bs um tu t o h de R omauu Ecc lesi o s o c . I rn t e

s s V0 33 e us de Ecclesia uon est pa ag e , and I ﬁnd , j 3 , u u s the ut t r t s the ss obse m . Th a hor in e pola e pa age ;

s s the Romema is not t he add him elf word , which here ,

t u t o o the t t r ss st t s t t it al ho gh , , con ex exp e ly a e ha refers t o the Universal Church : J am uero fis tce ” iuiuce u es rs s ita mani estce s t d oc de Unive a Eccle ia f um .

The same author brings forward the authority of S Ambro se in the se t erms : The Roman Church ”

t t s s . s the s may be emp ed , ay S Ambro e in econd “ his t r t s De Fide ad Gratiauum ut book of ea i e , , b ” r Ali uand . o t t t ut t changed neve q en a a, m a a ” u t ur h u . t o t e ss n nq am I n again pa age , and I

1 Au in . u st t . ix . . 3 59 n . 3 2 . S g , , p , 38

not the R oma h h ut tali n C urc b I a . us the ﬁnd , , Th author has sub stitut ed the words Roman Church for th r talia e wo d I . t u i st . ust t h Ano her in ance S . A g ine rela e s in s “ lett ers t hat the Pelag ian s Conciliorum Episcop alium uig ilautia e tiam a duobus ueuerabilibus autis tibus ” A stoli edis t t t r i tiano o cae S o o o be Chr s . p hen , Aft erwards the holy Doct or qu ot e s the very words of

Z o z imu s s t t these words o f Pope , and prove ha in the Apo st olic See is cont ained the expre ssion of the ancient and fu ndament al Catholic Faith so ﬁrmly

r t t it is unlawful or hr st t o and clea ly , ha f any C i ian ” u it his s A o st olic s t am do bt . In verbi p ae Sedi antiqu a at que fundat a cert a e t clara e st Catholic a ” 1 i ill u t r r s ut s S t st . Fide , nefa de a d bi a e Ch i iano In order t o extract from t hi s passage a proof of Infalli b ilit t W r s s t ut the y, Fa her eninge ay no hing abo

E s u s Oouciliorum E isco alium nor pi copal Co ncil , p p , the t of the toto orbe Christiano Fai h whole world , ;

t t h st r o f u ust u s e s . he only q o e la wo d S A g ine ,

tt the his s o f t s s omi ing word , and , by mean hi imple

u ss t s t o the s t o f r s ppre ion , he eleva e po i ion a gene al

t u u st r li s t o maxim tha which S . A g ine me ely app e

the rt u t u st t o the t u s pa ic lar fac in q e ion , ac al word ,

r mu his verbis o f Z o z i S . , Pope

is t r on the rt of s one There , hen , he e , pa ome , an

t . s s t s t t t r int en ional omi ion , a ma erial fal iﬁca ion , oge he

h s s r t o the t s s o f wit fal e rea oning , confo mable he i h u u t the ut b ut not t o t e ss . s . a hor , pa age from S A g ine

1 Ib i t . u . . 1 062 . d , , p

u the u t u the . C u vol me , j dg men prono nced by VI o ncil at it s thirteenth se s sion Havin g read t he dog matic “ tt rs tt us t le e wri en by Serg i , formerly Pa riarch of

thi s t t t o rus s ss Imperial ci y , bo h Cy , Bi hop of Pha i ,

t o us r r and Honori , fo merly Pope of old Rome , mo e over the reply of the s ame Honorius t o the afore

s u s ﬁn di t t o b e to t r aid Serg i , and ng hem al g e he

i the t hi o f the st s the de ﬁ ni al en from eac ng Apo le ,

t s of u s t he s tim t s of ion holy Co ncil , and en en

t t s t t t the eminen Fa her , and al og e her ag reeing wi h

r s o f the r t s t r t as er or he e ic , we rejec and abho hem

s u - st t us r t i i m ou s o l de roying ; and , h abho ring he r m

s u t t the n ame S ~ O f t dog ma , we have j dg ed ha heir authors oug ht t o be cast out o f the holy Church of

Go d o f u s r s t s Serg i , forme ly Bi hop of hi

r t us of r of u s impe ial ci y of Cyr Alexand ia Pyrrh ,

t u s sat on t he t ro o f Pe er , and Pa l, who al o h ne — Const antinople ; o f Theodore of Pharan all o f

the st ss t whom mo holy and ble ed Ag a ho , Pope of

t s his s t t o o ur st old Rome , men ion in re crip mo pious and illustriou s Emperor ; all o f whom he reject s as holding O pini on s contrary t o the orthodox

t smitt wi t t . Fai h , and whom we have en h ana hema W e have also read the Synodical letters of

S O hro niu S r s p , of vene able memory , formerly Bi hop

o f rus the t i Je alem , holy ci y of God, and , ﬁnd ng

t t o e t t he t u t wi t the t hem ag re wi h r e Fai h , h eaching

the st s i t t s r of Apo le and em nen Fa her , we eceive them as orthodox and of advant ag e t o the Holy

u t t W e Ch rch Ca holic and Apo s olic ; and have, 41

afﬁ rmed that his name oug ht t o be insert ed in the ” f the ur diptychs o Ch che s . The reader has before him the t ext of the judg ment

t u i n ot of the . u s s t s s VI Co ncil , and he ee ha Honori

i But s t s sult ? condemned in t . whence doe hi re

r the t t t t h u an d F om fac ha hey ave , p rely Simply , t out the t t of thi s ud t as it aken of ex j gmen , if had

c ut out wit s s s rs t he wi been h a pair of ci o , follo ng

ss u s all the ll t s of pa age , which occ r in co ec ion “ Councils At the same time we have cast out o f

the t ur t t s r us Ca holic Ch ch and ana hema i ed Hono i ,

O ld us u Pope of Rome , beca e we have fo nd , in

hi s tt s t o i u s that he ado ts his teachin le er Serg , p g

in all thin s s his i us u g , and conﬁrm mpio j dg

t s men . They have c ut out thi s fundament al part o f the

u t hi u s e t the r s j dgmen , w ch occ r b ween wo d , and

s t t t the r s whom we mi e wi h ana hema , and wo d , We have also read the Synodical lett ers ‘ of

O hro niu t t s o h i the S p S . Be ween he e tw p rase s s

s s the t of us T pa age of condemna ion Honori . hey

c ut it out tt n t o ut s st s Simmy , by omi i g p everal op

t the t o r t t be ween w ph ase s hus acked tog ether .

t s rs s t r m I beg all ho e pe on , and hey are ve y anyin

u e r t st t s u sti s t o n mb , who are in ere ed in he e q e on , distrust the pas sage s adduced by the school of error

t t di hi the s o f wi h which I am con en ng , w ch Bi hop O rleans has so happily named Romanism g one mad

Romanisme s sé hi e has S O ( in en ) , w ch F nelon well

u i s s t u t ut deno nced, and of wh ch he ay , wi h profo nd r h , 42 he dreads it for the Church more than all the heretical t s ec s .

Ye s t u su s u us the , r ly , ch a chool wo ld ca e weak t o

s t r t It n lo e hei fai h . makes o e g iddy t o se e such mas ses o f error built upon the foundation of ancient i stu s t s u s t as mpo re , and heir con eq ence main ained if the stu not unm s impo re had been a ked .

m u ll . su a t i s L tt VII I now p h e er . 1 have kept the promis e which I made on the

st L tt 1 s appearance Of my Fir e er . have hewn ,

s u t t t o st s u t s s t t Mon eig ne r, ha , e abli h yo r he i , ha of

s li lit ou u per onal Infal bi y , y have been working pon

s u t s sa the s of t s fal e doc men . I y ame all ho e who

t the s t s s t ut t main ain ame he i , wi ho any excep ion .

t or t They have all, direc ly indirec ly , been working u dmi u s u t s tt as s . pon fal e doc men , now a ed ch The

u t i u u u q es ion s abs ol t ely g ang rened with fra d . Yo r

i t of ll lit assertion that th s doc rine personal In—fa ibi y po s sesses the Splendour o f a positive truth a t ruth admitted by the g reat e st name s in theolog y in all

s —is t wit t t s t s ag e , when confron ed h ex and fac ,

S O st u n t t it u the t ut t o a o ndi g , ha wo ld be —nearer r h t the s t u t t t t s main ain Oppo i e arg men namely , ha hi

ct is t s n ot tt do rine eviden ly fal e , having been admi ed

o f the t s of t a e by any grea name heolog y in any g , save only by tho se whom the falsehoods and the now ” admitt ed frauds have deceived . We have seen that wonderful chapter of Melchior

u r t h the ust r u s Cano in favo Of Infallibili y , in whic ill io 43

t n t u s t ss s heolog ia in rod ce eigh een g rand forg ed pa ag e ,

r t r r the s t s o r t he bor owed ei he f om fal e decre al , from

tt rs t s us r the apocryphal le e Of S . A hana i , or f om

t s Arabian Canons of the Council of Nicaea . Upon hi t hick stratum of forg erie s he construct s his theolog ical

ediﬁce .

ut i is r B Melch or Cano followed by Bella mine , who

s u the s s s t u t s work pon ame ba i , al ho gh wi h ome precaution and some discernment with reg ard t o the

r s r It s s as passage s which he b ing forwa d . eem

u has u t s t ho gh he already do b . But aft er Bellarmine and Melchior Cano there is

L u r wit ut su s t S . ig o i , who , ho a picion Of any hing ,

u s the s ss s r r s reprod ce ame pa ag e , al eady p oved fal e

u r t rs u t s a h nd ed and ﬁf y yea Since , and, pon hi void,

st ru t s t he s di recon c ame e ﬁce .

s s u s the s u The e , Mon eigne r , are preci ely fal e doc

t s u on whic h ou u s r men p y have yo r elf wo ked , Since

ou the son s of L u t y are and di ciple S . ig ori . Tha t he se document s Should have deceived you up till

s not st n s s t now doe a o i h me , Since I my elf, ﬁf een

rs su s t ut t yea ago , ppo ed hem a hen ic ; only I avoided

out the s u s of i following con eq ence my belief. Th s Shews the nece ssity of int roducing amongst uS more

t t stu s of s st st r of impor an die eccle ia ical hi o y , and

lli r thi s st t s t ll expe ng f om hi ory , hencefor h cien iﬁca y

out t r t t s s the s s worked in elemen a y rea i e , fal ehood

s r it which di g ace .

ul ou s s u t I co d have Shewn y al o , Mon eigne r , wi h

r t o t s u st the s u f t s of th rega d hi q e ion , ec lar e for e 44

liturg i st s of the Roman Court t o stiﬂe the t ruth by the alt eration o f the Breviary the conde mnation o f Honorius everywhere carefully blott ed out ; the false decret als introduced on all Side s ; the fable o f Sinue ssa

su the Friona S edes a nemine udicatur pplying axiom , j

the st o f Damasu s u t u s is hi ory S . c r ailed , beca e he a Pope t ried and acquitt ed by a Council ; many Pope s o f the early cent urie s int roduced at the close Of the

1 6th tu s t the s cen ry , alway in company wi h fal e decret als the same Operation practised at the clo se o f the 1 7th cent ury in the ofﬁce proper p ro cle ro

R omano t t t o o fi t rs t the ull and ha , , f y yea af er f proof

o f t he r u ul t r t of t s cu t f a d en cha ac er he e do men s .

s the u s st tur ut The e are g ro nd , hi orical and li g ical , p

r t s t s su t o f s ut fo ward , in he e la er age , in ppor ab ol e

s i t power and per onal Infall bili y .

ut l ou u B e t t ss . s n s hem pa I have hew y , Mon eig ne r ,

t he di a e the u s and. ss o f in me eval p riod , geni holine

m s u s u t i s u st o S . Tho a Aq ina deceived pon h q e i n by the Thesaurus the G t s u s of reek Fa her and Co ncil , in which are found the pass ag e s invent ed in favour o f the exalt ation o f the Holy See by a forg er o f the

1 th u s is the t s s rr u o 3 cent ry . Thi o her ba i of e or p n

ou n in as se e which y have bee work g , we Shall in my

r L tt r Thi d e e .

s din t o the t o f t he th s t o t t i A cen g ime Fa er , ha per od

t s two e t s o s did not ist when he e gr a fal eh od ex , we no

t t s at st long er , in any way wha ever , find race , lea in t he st tu s m st the t s fir five cen rie and a ong grea name , of the do ctrine which you say is admit t e d b y the 45

h t all s . t e g reatest names in heolog y in age Now, ﬁrst ﬁve centurie s are evidently by far t he mo st

t s t t s not worthy of our en ire re pec . Tha which doe

h t tu s s not x st at exist in t e ﬁrs ﬁve cen rie doe e i all ,

r if I may S O exp e ss myself.

s t he vi r We have een , in Roman Bre a y, how, by

r a us cutting off from the ce lebrat ed passage Of S . I en e the st rt the s ua s r his la pa of phra e , In q empe ab ,

ui su t un di u e s r t e st uee e st q n q , con e va a ea q ab ” A o st olis t r t is t o the te t p adi io , a meaning g iven x o f r a u s r diff t t t o f the S . I en e ve y eren from ha holy

L u r att rib utin t o him t W e s . Doc or . have een S ig o i g

s x at is u a deci ive a iom , which in no way all fo nd in

t W e a s t he t r the t ex . h ve een very learned Fa he

r r t o t r t s t the Per one , in o der ex ac ome hing from

r t rs u o f the t s s u t ea ly Greek Fa he in favo r he i , q o ing

r rt r s h n ot from S . Cy il ce ain wo d , whic do in any

u o f the u t o t he way , in favo r Holy See , come p

t the r s o f ssu t o r t s of warm h of wo d Bo e ho e Mgr .

And we se e the same Father Perrone

r r t r O r i the e t fo wa d a Commen a y of igen , in wh ch gr a Doct or ab solute ly maintains the very cont rary o f the t s s r us s t o the s he i , and ef e perceive in Go pel any kin d o f privilege fo r Pete r ; another the sis which

far r mitt b ut is the t s s we are f om ad ing , which he i o f O r the i t igen in place ind ca ed .

W e s t t t he u s R oma locuta have een ha famo adage , est causa nita es t i n t s o u . u ust , ﬁ , fo nd in S A g ine .

s ss s t o We have een , in ﬁne , pa age in erp late d from 46

A s . u ust t o tt S . mbro e and from S A g ine , in order a ain

t o th e same end .

Do ou s ur 111 the st of the y know , Mon eig ne , hi ory

u u st t i s hi h man mind, any q e ion , heological , ph lo op cal ,

st r t s hi has so i s hi o ical , or o herwi e , w ch been d g raced

s t the r the by fal ehood , bad fai h , and whole wo k of

s ? sa it It is u st utt forg er I y ag ain , a q e ion erly u g ang rened by fra d .

IS it n ot t ur o f s t ime for men of hono , men inceri y ,

of t t o t s s t he men fai h look hi candal in face , and

the t r the s s b ut drive from emple , no long e only eller , the s t he s of s li us or robber and coiner ba e coin , re g io moral

s uilt t the who The e are more g y han forg er , in

at thi s t has r t o u st France ime , been handed ove j ice fo r having forg ed and t rafﬁcked in false scientiﬁc t documen s .

at t he t o f t s u t t s VIII . Now , Sig h hi a daci y and hi power of falsehood introducing it self int o theolog y

' at the s t of t s s ri s ig h he e error and palpable forge e ,

ul te t he u t r t ut rs t s s prom ga d , by a ho i y of a ho hem elve

t r u t o the t o f the u l o f en irely Since e , p ime Co nci

r t u t o the the 1 8th tu T en , and even p end of cen ry ,

u t o t s r s t t u st and even p hi p e en ime , I can nder and that all t ho se who do n ot t ake in the whole of the

t di s c r u t s ul s s . q e s ion Sho d be eized wi h g id ne , and y

out t t ? t , Wha , hen , can we believe now Wha become the bases of the faith ? I hasten t og ive a brief and peremptory reply t o

political as pe ct only t hat the quarrel is treated rig or i o usl t t thi s t t s s . u y, and ha con en ion ari e O r Lord

sus the st r t e s u s thi s r Je , beloved Ma e , ache m p ophetic “ s as Hi s r s : t t word , all wo d are A con en ion arose “ “ n st the st s s s the G s amo g Apo le , ay o pel , which ” t ul the t st n t n i of hem Sho d be grea e . Co e t o facta “ e st t e o s ui s e orum vide re tur ss r in er q e e majo .

' ow at the re sent the urt s o f o ne o f th N , p day co ier e t st s o f him is the s welve Apo le , who , moreover , , in eye o f all the te st t s u t rs s t o sa t o the , g rea , he e co r ie eem y “ hr st He is t the t rs are C i ian people , . every hing , o he ” thin hi s is the di u no g . T sp t e fore seen by Je sus

st L e t u n t u i . s o t ut t the ur Chri be ro bled abo , Ch ch o f sus r st ll n o t s t r u t s di ut Je Ch i wi peri h h o g h hi sp e . She has passed throug h other cri se s ; the cont ention bet ween the anti - Pope s w as far more terrifying than

h ' nt di ut L t u u of t e pre se sp e . e s be f ll conﬁdence in

Go d n our L r e Su S st the H t , i o d J Chri , in oly Spiri ,

ns the ur r s it o n t r s Who g over Ch ch , and ca rie owa d it — h u t o f the Y s t e s . e s end conq e whole world , I

- e s t t t o f the r s believe y , I know ha , in Spi e c ime ,

' the l s the s s the s o f fol ie , fal ehood , and error men , I

t t the r t il st rt di s know ha Holy Spi i w l mo ce ainly play,

the t li u the r in Ca ho c Ch rch and in whole wo ld , all

t ru t l u ust t . t j ice , all h,all liber y And He wil re ni e in

u st t ut rt all the of j ice , and in r h , and in libe y men

t u ut the t g oodwill who dwell hro g ho whole ear h .

wi r the E st t il They ll come back f om a , hey w l come

the t t us t ill back from Nor h , and wi h hey w Spread

t o the new st t o our t s s te . We , bro her now epara d 49

of s wil it is The epoch cience l come , and already beginnin g by the severe criticism of the falsehoods

i uS hi di u s b ut wh ch have deceived , w ch have vided , which rage only upon the surface of the earthen

t ut t u hi the t su s s . ve el, wi ho o c ng in any way rea re

r t rs I the r B o he beloved , have conﬁdence In wo ld ' ” ou t r u t s the L r b ut y will have ib la ion , aid o d , be ” t r th r r e . of good comfo , I have ove come wo ld In

u re ssuram hab eb itis se d c onﬁ dit e E o m ndo p ; , g ” u um vici m nd .

AS t o s s t o t my elf, I de ire here hank God for bring ing me on t o the clo s e of life with an increasing — conviction a conviction ﬁ rm in me at twenty years

f r s o I t s . age , when ook my vow for life God be p ai ed for nearly forty years I thank Him daily fo r my

ss t Him fo r hav m ble ed calling . I hank above all g borne with me S O long ; and I thank Him the more

r st as rs t t s t o ea ne ly, my yea ﬂow by , ha He deign

r s 1 n ot sa the r ss b ut the a inc ea e , do y ﬁ mne , pe ce ,

the t the the s t t ligh , evidence , ereni y of my Fai h . — And the pre sent di sput e shall I dare t o say s o

st sad s t in ead of making me , ﬁll me wi h a new joy How can this be ? It is becaus e I understand more

n ow t r our t the clearly han eve , why admirable Mo her ,

ur the t r u t s Holy Ch ch of God , Mo he of h mani y , who e Spirit is nothing els e than the unity of all t he j ust who

li —I u rst sa o ur have ever ved nde and , I y, why

t r at t s s r ru s beloved Mo he , even hi day , ca cely le a t t t rt t he u r r s o f wen ie h pa of h man ace . The ea on the Slow prog ress is this it is the s ecret and int ernal D 50

foe which stop s our march it is the school of error

u hi is t r t the which I deno nce , and w ch none o he han

st s st t s ates o hell hi ob acle fore een by Chri , ho e g f w ch

t t t b ut t o r a st t he will a emp , in vain , p evail g ain

r Chu ch .

ow the o f the hi s s N , clear view enemy, of work

hi s t s lls w t him and ac ion , ﬁ me i h hope . Behold , — the hidden enemy I behold him unmasked ! I Se e t t t t the u ha he will be expelled , and ha Holy Ch rch;

r r rt o f the O st ll o on delive ed f om a pa b acle , wi g advancing in her divine Splendour t o conquer the

r s le t u s su it as wo ld . Thi made clear , re me , w h

the ur u t o f our u ur as ss s . m ch vig o calmne , p i enemy h u hi t s O e t o s L t . Thi I p do , Mon eigne r , in a T rd e er N U V , U U U l W ' U U W U U V 0

‘ G M R . T HE O O F O L BISH P R EANS ,

‘ GR M THE ARCHBISHO P O F MALINE S .

T H I R D L ET T E R

M O N S E I G N EU R D E C H A MP S ,

A T A . G R R Y

' ’ ’ ' ' P retre de 1 Oratozre Meml re fie Z A caaémze Frarz azse , g .

TR A N S L A TE D F R O M T H E F REN C H B Y

T . J . BAILEY B A , .

P riest o the hur h E n land f C c of g .

LO NDO N

. T H YES Y P CE . 1 . A , L ALL LA

S MP M S H AND c o P T E O S TE R O W ! . . I IN , AR ALL, , A RN R

I H N G W ! E G BR G T O . A LIN .

! A ll rig hts reserved ! It is un erst t at t is letter like all m t er rks d ood h h , y o h wo , sim l re resent s the o i mon the aut r and es not p y p p of ho , do bind the Oratoire in any way A G A . R TRY ,

Prie s t o f th e O rat o ire , Me mb e r of th A m e cade y .

A ’ TR NSLATOR S NOTE .

As se eral the translati ns ic the atin te t v of o , of wh h L x is i en are not strictl lit eral I t ink it ri t to add t at g v , y , h g h h the translations are made from the French of Father

Gratr andnot e clusi el r m the atin . y , x v y f o L

T . J . B . THIRD LETTER T O MO NSEIGNEUR THE

A F RCHBISHO P O MALINES .

s u Mon eig ne r ,

I have no long er only to reply to the letter addressed

o u t o the s O r s b ut o u n by y Bi hop of lean , y have deig ed t o d ss t o s Firs t L etter I ntroduction ad re my elf a , or “ t o a continuation of works entitled : L etters to the ” r nd F th r ratr R eve e a e G y.

u ll se e t s as s r t The p blic wi in hi , I do my elf, a g ea u B ut t th honour which yo u confer pon me . wha e

u t se e is the t tt the p blic canno , priva e le er which , on

s u t t as s ame day , yo r hear , bo h Bi hop and friend , t addressed o me .

1 s t s s t had never een , in hi re pec , in a polemical

te st the t s the st and s con , hear ri ing above rife , aying “ W t the s t us ha ever may happen , friend hip be ween ” is for life and death .

But u t s u ou u t o , f r her, Mon eigne r, y are g ood eno gh

s t o st u t o the t —o ne propo e me a r ggle dea h , which

“ includes the entire destruction o f the error which

prepo ssesses one o r the other of . us : a struggle in 4 which one o f the adversaries must surrender and

s t o acknowledg e him elf have been deceived .

s M s u has n the Thi , on eigne r, bee dream of my life

l - ss s has a dream wel nig h impo ible , and which , perhap , “ But t is s never been realised . hat which impos ible ” “ ” t the s is w t s s ss . wi h men , ay Go pel , po ible i h God

Now G o d is t t a t - ﬁlls u rt , ha ch ri y which yo r hea ,

s u t —t t t h Mon eig ne r and my bro her, ha chari y w ich , t u t o s . af er yo r example , I hope pre erve in mine

t t t all t t t ou I accep , hen , wi h my hear , ha which y

s t o s to t t t propo e me , and I promi e admi for hwi h any error that yo u may point o ut to me . May God be

t n us and t s s uss h n be wee , may all hi di c ion , w ich beg a

li tt t st . ke a ba le , end wi h a harve

t o st M s u I am g oing reply ﬁr , on eig ne r, in a few

s t o u I ntroduc tion t s u su the word , yo r ; hen I hall p r e

s s consideration o f your Letter to the Bi hop Of O rlean .

1. — ust t s u a M I beg in by a complain , Mon eigne r, complaint ag ainst yourself ? t t But I mean t o limit myself t o a complain . Tha

tt n o w n which I had wri e here in my defence , I

no t t u the t t o tt t o the suppress . I have r ly ime a end

It is the u t t 1 ust defence o f myself. Ch rch ha m defend ag ainst the school o f error which now troubles it .

Ye s it is the C u t t , h rch ha I defend , in openly f deploring this which follows I am accused o failing

“ h ur o ur t us in my duty to t e Ch ch Mo her, beca e I

They maint ain t hat no t o nly did they not pronounce O u u st t b ut no t u t pon a q e ion of fai h , even pon a dog ma ic t t u n t . t u o a fac Upon wha , hen , did hey prono nce p

articular act No w u st p f . Co ncils may be mi aken u t u t pon a par ic lar fac . T hus the solemn j udg ment given in their dog matic decrees by three (Ecumenical Councils upon the

t tt s o f t s u t is no t dog ma ic le er a Pope , hi j dg men a

t u t NO it is not u st dog ma ic j dg men , a q e ion here of

t t ! NO it is t a dog ma ic fac , only an error eaching a 1 u partic lar fact .

ask u st t s r u t and , I if anyone can nder and ( hi a g men se e anything else in it b ut absolutely empty words ?

Ye s I ask t ust s of t s t us , wha m be aid ho e who h

t t the s o f u s ? s i us rea decree Co ncil who , ee ng Honori

t ( u u s w t ut condemned by hree Ec menical Co ncil , i ho

t t s s t t t s reckoning wen y Pope , imply reply ha ho e

u s st n ? the ur Co ncil were mi ake who , hearing Ch ch “ r o ut o m t s t t o the c y , in her d g a ic decree , Ana hema heretic H o norl us smother with all their power this

t a i n t t us s o f s ana hem , and , heir en h ia m di obedience

t t t t o the u s and con radic ion wi h reg ard Co ncil , cry

o ut t tu t o the the u , in heir rn , drown voice of Ch rch , “ Honour t o the g reat H onorius ! honour to the divine ” H onorius l

t s u l ﬁ ti s M s i u in our I ﬁnd he e q a i ca on , on e g ne r, y

t t u t u tt u the rac pon Infallibili y, and in yo r le er pon

l But how is it that they do not see that the de cision of this p articular fact

su ses and eci e s im licitl a eneral rinci le immens e e tent viz : t at ppo d d , p y, g p p of x , , h

a matic letter of aP e a resse to the m st inﬂuential Patriarc al the g p , f do l o dd d o h o h f ma Churc b e eretical and con emne as suc . h , y h d d h 7

It i f t Mon u t f us. s q es ion o Honori per ec ly clear, s u t t I do no t s to u s t s eigne r, ha a cribe yo r elf he e

But I the sentiments Of disobedience . draw ﬁnal

u s u t s s to s t t it is s . c onseq ence of yo r he i , how ha fal e

11.

thi s t to f st ou From all , I only in end in er ag ain y ,

s ur st so t us Mon eig ne , and ag ain many o her g enero s ts t s t b ut s t t t piri following hi pa h , one ingle hing ha , as s at the t o f t s tt s ou I aid commencemen he e le er , y

u s d u ts t s 1 have worked pon fal e oc men , and hi have s o u s ou the s u ts hewn y . I have hewn y fal e doc men , and I Shall continue t o ﬁg ht ag ainst the school o f

s sts u t t s s u error, which per i in circ la ing he e fal e doc

ts t s u s men , and living by heir con eq ence and in t t accordance wi h heir spirit .

as t t s us S And , for ha which concern Honori , ince

ou tu t o it s u I t o o ust s tu y re rn , Mon eigne r, m al o re rn it to here in a few words .

Yo u t s u t o the ss s reply, hen , Mon eigne r, pa ag e and facts which I have g athered tog ether upon this question : 1 ss . u u the u st ( ) By a pa ag e of S Lig ori pon q e ion . ( 2 ) By a promise of a fuller reply with decisive passag es.

s se Monse l neur ou not k Thi promi , g , y will eep , unless yo u have discovered some treasure o f unpub h lis e d passag es .

s s t s the st six t s My elf, and everal o her , for la mon h ,

u the k w ss s have been working pon all no n pa ag e . 8

W e have taken them in their Latin and Greek

i s orig nal . I have been able t o g e t g reat help from a very

u s learned unp bli hed dissertation of Father Garnier .

I have made use o f the very excellent work of M . de Rosiere upon the Liber Diurnus ; quite a recent

r . s u wo k Finally , we have had , a few day Since , pon

t s t the st t c hi poin , in French , mo comple e work whi h — M sts u t s su t the u w r. exi pon hi bjec , viz . , vol me hich g

Héfélé his t st the u s , in mag niﬁcen Hi ory of Co ncil ,

the n s t s to compiled over ag ain from orig i al , dedica e

the u st f I do no t t t t q e ion o Honorius . hink ha any

thing can be discovered which is no t in this dissertation .

the us s M r Héfélé s t o Now , concl ion which g . come ,

It i u n s ut . are ours also . s a q estio ab ol ely decided

ou t s su t the o u The more y defend hi bjec , more will y

i t o f the s the t be conv c ed error, and ooner will li erary

public be enlig htened upon this point .

A h ss r m u I t t . s t o t e . pa ag e f o S Lig ori , reply, ha S Lig uori could no t have known the decisive works

ust t t t s s which I have j named ha , in addi ion , he eem no t t o have made ac quaintance with the orig inals ;

t t st as hl s r r s s ts t and ha , la ly , eply e olve i elf in o main t aining that the passag e from the letters of Honorius

’ is r t t t t the u s st pe fec ly or hodox , ha Co ncil were mi aken ,

O f t t t t s us as a reply ha kind canno be aken erio ly, I t It i have j us shewn . s a reply which a Catholic

t t s t o s t t canno admi and I conﬁne my elf aying , ha , in

the ut o f s it is the st st s mo h a Bi hop , mo a oni hing proof

s o f preoccupation . “ But they have also replied to me : Undoubtedly

tt s st to s tt t t t u ut le er , de ined e le dog ma ic eaching hro gho

th st hu But i it e whole Ea ern C rch . s possible t o

s tt t t the st u e le dog ma ic eaching for Ea ern Ch rch , without settling it for t he whole Church ? What

u m t u no t b e fo r wo ld a dog a ic decree be , which Sho ld the whole Church W hat does this distinction

? Is it no t t o o t st w t ut mean really ligh , and almo i ho

s t t is m t fo r u con idera ion Tha which dog a ic _ a Ch rch , h s u is t t e u . for a Sing le o l , dog ma ic for whole Ch rch

ac t ex cathedra o r the t it To make an , con rary, will

t suf t o t at the t o t hen ﬁce wri e beginning , or omi doing “ so t s s : For the whole Church with , he e word , and h m ” anat e a. M I s u t t b o t ou r. believe , Mon eig ne r , ha h y and g

t t s as the st Manning are perfec ly aware of hi , well mo

" u Yo u t t skilful defenders o f Honori s . know well ha he did no t write these letters as a private doctor ; you know well that it is as Pope that he replied to letters addressed t o the PO pe .

s u t is the s st Ag ain , Mon eig ne r, wha y em which

u M r t t to the yo and g . Manning adop wi h reg ard

o f us You t s ut defence Honori main ain , ab ol ely , t t w as not as t t t ha he condemned here ical, and ha t s is Yo u t t i s t u the hi clear. main ain h , al ho g h con “ t rar is t . Yo u t t t no t y eviden main ain ha , only

not t t s b ut t t did he each Mono heli m , ha he formally ” t u t th t M r e . t . his ur not a g h con rary g Manning , in n ,

th o u o r 1 an u t o f the having , any more an y , y do b

ut t t the tt s t s t t th s tt s a hen ici y of le er , main ain ha e e le er e xist in orde r to prove the perfect orthodoxy o f his 1 1 t a h Y u t t t was not . o e c ing main ain , in ﬁne , ha he con d mn ut admit ' that e e d s b . for here y , for neg lig ence I

' L n n i t w as . e o i o e h s tt s s s t S , of le er , ay ha he con

’ de mne d I uote d the ssa for neglig ence. have q pa g e ” neg lig endo confovit : b ut does that prevent his also

fo r s ? s all having been condemned here y No , ince the t s the st . st condemna ion exi They exi , for here are

' ss s the ut t t o f w is u t pa ag e , a hen ici y hich beyond do b , and is no t disputed by you W e have expelled from ‘ the t u t t us Ca holic Ch rch and ana hema ized Honori , ‘ us his tt s t o us v beca e , in le er Sergi , we ha e recognized

that in ever thin he has ollowed the doctrine o , y g , f f ”

S er ius and his us t s . g , conﬁrmed impio doc rine

is not the t Now , a Pope expelled from Ca holic Church for a sin of neglig ence Cum his vero simul

s t atholic a s simul ue projici a anc a Dei C Eccle ia , q ‘ anathe matiz ari ree vidimus e t H ono ri um ui fuerat p , , q ‘ t ues e c c u inve nimus s ta Papa an iq Rom e , q od per crip , ‘ uae e o t su t S e r ium u us q ab fac a n ad g , q ia in omnib ejue mentem se cutus e st e t impia dogmata c onﬁ rma ” ‘ it l v .

‘ Is not t s suf t s ? NO o u sa hi ﬁcien ly deci ive , y will y, fo r the t t s is n t u st Mono heli e here y o here in q e ion .

is the ss it . is u st Well, here pa ag e in which in q e ion .

s ss is th u its t Thi pa ag e from e VII. Co ncil in dogma ic “ decree We proclaim in our Lord two wills and two

r ti ns w t th O e a o e . u t p , and i h VI Co ncil we rejec Ser ‘ us us t s w ho gi , Honori , and all ho e follow t t g Deinde u u e t u s voluntate s heir eachin Q q oq e d a

1 ar uin Concil. . iii. . 13 34 . H do , , v p 12

‘ e t o pe ratione s in Christo pree dic amus ; quemadmo dum ‘ st t s ta s us e x clamavit ab ic ie ns Con an inopoli ex ynod , j ‘ S e r ium H ono rium t u istis s g , a q e imilia ‘ se ntie nte s They are all condemned because they do not admit in Jesus Christ the tw o operations and

the tw o wills .

t us Here , hen , we ﬁnd Honori condemned for

“

t am- s o n u t O f s . here y , and acco n Mono heli m I very well t m t has t di t s aware ha he con ra c ed hi elf, and I believe ,

t M r H f l t us w as no t t at . é é é t wi h g , ha Honori here ical

t no r s s i i t b ut his tt s hear , even , perhap , in p r le er are

t s t u t here ical , ince hree General Co ncils, in heir

t s s ut t as su . dog ma ic decree , ab ol ely condemn hem ch

t s s su as a e t Taken by hem elve , ch we h v hem , we ﬁnd

s u t r s t . us s really here y Honori , when con l ed e pec ing

t he u t Or u t o f sus st di d not ni y d ali y will in Je Chri , “ cease t o afﬁrm and repeat this We must neither say

o ne t t o ne the t are will nor w o wills . Bo h and o her

su : s atis ine tum ab rd p .

us su t u t s t as Honori , con l ed pon hi poin Pope , did

t as su t u the t hen reply if, when con l ed pon Trini y and u the u o f rs s s W e ust pon n mber Pe on , he had aid m

t t O ne s s s t nei her each Per on , nor Three Per on ; bo h ” Is n t t s i t he o ne and the other are absurd . o hi deny ng

t t it is su ? Is no t t s dog ma , and declaring ha ab rd hi heresy it self ?

s u t t the Mon eig ne r, ei her no hing can be proved by

ts the ssa s u t o r ul fac and pa g e q o ed , I have f ly proved

t s n o u sa t u st tt : hi , whe y y and repea in yo r la le er

1 ar uin . . . 454. H do , v iv , p

not se e wh t t s ss o f as I do a hi pa ag e S . Thom proves o n the u st q e ion . I perfectly se e in it that the Pope has the ni tu of ontiﬁ c al b ut s n the ple de p power , avi g

s t the u s the 1 do not compari on be ween j dg e and king , “ see any thing which t ells us that the Bishops have no Share in the supreme power.

T o l t u t s su t I the en ig h en me pon hi bjec , open ' a nama f the at the of S o . s S Thoma , and in index end the k Index tertius u e w for boo ( ) , I ﬁnd reprod c d, ord

t he ss hi ou u te . t word , pa ag e w ch y have q o d I expec t o ﬁnd it in the questions t o ‘ which the Index re fers It i u . s no t inth mma It is s s me e S . omewhere el e h umm Th . s b ut t e S a eal at the in S Thoma , in , place t h is o t s t . which I am referred , i wha I have before me “ s s s has the u S . Thoma ay : The Pope in Ch rch the plenitude o f power The Bishops ‘ “ have in the Church the supreme power Papa habet in Ecclesia ple nitudinem pot e st atis ‘ s o b tine nt in E es summam t st t Epi copi ccl ia po e a em .

t at s u . s Here hen , once , Mon eig ne r , S Thoma

A u s sult at the ss t o u uo q ina , con ed pa ag e which yo r q t atio n s us t s the t t to u refer , eache con rary doc rine yo r

fundament al thesis . Yo u say that the Bishops have no share i n the eu

s u s s preme power ; S . Thoma Aq ina ays that the

s s the ur the su Bi hop ; have , in Ch ch , preme power . He does not say simply the contrary o f what you

s not sa nl t t the s s afﬁrm . He doe y o y ha Bi hop have

m 1 Ide . m 2 3a . 72 art . xi . c r . et ad 1 . , q , , o p 15

m r t ut so e sha e the su . s s in preme power He ay , wi ho

st t s s ss ss the u any re ric ion The Bi hop po e , in Ch rch , ‘ the supreme power Episcopi ob tinent in Ecclesia

summam potestatem .

IV .

t s u ul . s In reali y, Mon eigne r, how co d S Thoma have possibly favoured this proposition It would be a denial that the Holy Spirit has appointed Bishops t o ”— n the u o f t s s o f . u g over Ch rch God , ho e word S Pa l It o u u t at the o f u tt . which y q o e , beg inning yo r le er w oul d be a contradiction of all that Holy Scripture t s u t s su t t t sus st has eache pon hi bjec , of all ha Je Chri s o r t o the st s the s s aid g iven Apo le , Of whom Bi hop ” h u s s s s s u s s t e s . are S cce or , ay S Thoma Aq ina him elf ” ’ i i l even Apostoli quorum vic em g e runt Ep sc op .

s t su s u tu S . Thoma eviden ly only m p Holy Scrip re and

h s u w t t th t e s o f . s s s e pa ag e S Pa l , hen he ay imply ha ” B is ho s have in th hur h the s u r me ower p e C c p e p .

n ss s u ask s l t st n s I co fe , Mon eig ne r, I my e f wi h a o i h mt su s t u t u en , how ch a propo i ion co ld have in rod ced it self here ? Whence could so novel a proposition

? It s the ss t t u come come from log ical nece i y , in rod ced

the t s s o f s e arate infallibilit t s s here by he i p y a he i , in

t so st and so th t M r t reali y, rang e novel a , when g . Mare

u s his w i ts o n p bli hed book, in h ch he repea , every

t t it is u st o f d pag e , ha a q e ion now a new og ma, “ ” of s s ut s t lli t namely, per onal , ab ol e , epara e infa bili y, the s w as udl us su t d learned Bi hop lo y acc ed and in l e ,

1 I i b d . 16

as : u t o f t st to the g il y having crea ed a mon er, g ain u o f i st t . o ut t t it w as hono r de roying , They cried ha

u st o f s s ut se t in no way a q e ion per onal , ab ol e , para e b t infalli ili y .

t s is w h at s t s u ou Now , hi y, pre en , Mon eig ne r, y

I t t t M t h u t : g ran ha g r. Maret has sta ed t e q es ion well

' t s no w ou sa u st I i no long er , y y, a q e ion only ‘ n r t has u t x h d a M r. Of i fallibili y e cat e . g Mare nder ‘ st t s as st has has s ood hi de Mai re done , and he aid

' with him the u st is to q e ion , know where , ‘ ” h h u i t e C u t e s s t o u . in h rch , preme power be fo nd

t s st t t ou f t t the has Upon hi a emen , y a ﬁrm ha Pope

the urc the t u is t u in Ch h , pleni de of power, which r e

o u t is s t t the s s and y main ain , which fal e , ha Bi hop

the u h u m t e s . have , in Ch rch , no Share in pre e power “ tu the the s t Then , by vir e Of major, Where overeig n y ” is t is the i t ou u t t the , here infall bili y , y ded ce ha Pope

ss ss s t t t the i s t alone po e e infallibili y , and ha Ep copa e has n t t o share a all in his infallibility .

This is the teaching of Mg r. Manning . The learned

is ts t s t s t t Archb hop admi hi eaching , by aying , ha he wished formally t o state precisely the contrary thesis

r M r t is M . . f t o t t o f t t s s o . ha g Mare The he i g Mare , t t s s ut s t t is s ha per onal , ab ol e , epara e infallibili y , a fal e i t t t t s s o f M r. s doc rine . The he i g Manning , ha per s s ut s t t is the t u do c onal , ab ol e , epara e infallibili y, r e t rine . “ r st t s it t s t s Mg . Manning a e in he e erm The Pope

is t and s t the infallible , alone , apar epara e from ‘ s t t o r d is erse d. Epi copal body , whe her cong reg a ed p

‘ ' a I h ' ' s . t is t e t O f th u t g e doc rine e Co ncil of Tren .

It is t t h o u s u s ha w ich y declare here al o yo r elf, Mon

s u t s s the t u s ut eig ne r, by he e word , which are r e ol ion “ o f the dif u t : he u is ﬁc l y T Ch rch a living body, and

for the n al t the . t o se a t the i f libili y of head be p ra e ,

ts f ust s s t the head i el m need be epara ed from body,

and the Church in consequence be destroyed .

t s s s u t o s t t I mark he e ﬁne word , Mon eig ne r, how ha ,

” te o do n o t mi t the ct o f s te af r all , y u ad do rine epara

M r s s f t h . a o s Ag ain , w en g Manning pe k a epara e

l t s s t t the t infal ibili y , and ay ha Pope alone , apar and

t the s o w t r t separa e from epi copal b dy , he he cong reg a ed

o r s s is it s s t o t t di per ed , infallible , eem me clear, ha he

uts f t t r t s p or h a very g rea er or, and tha he lay down f h u as a principle the destruction even o t e Ch rch .

us t e st M s u u t o the Th , from h ﬁr , on eig ne r, yo r reply

s o f s s n ea in Bi hop O rlean commence by a error, b r g

h t f u t . . S upon t e very founda ion o all yo r arg umen . s u the o f the s t the Thoma , pon power Epi copa e in

u t s the tr to t t st tut s Ch rch , eache con ary ha which con i e “ u t s s t the s s yo r he i , namely Tha Bi hop have no ” s t hare in he supreme power .

s s no t sa t t t S . Thoma doe merely y ha hey have a

share in the s u reme ower s s fo r s s : p p , he ay more , he ay

h B is ho in the Church have t e su reme wer T e ps, , h p po ” s o i btinent s ummam otes tatem in E l s ia Epi c p o p cc e .

s ﬁ t n u nd . s O Here , he , Mon eig ne r, we S Thoma p

s t o t t t s o f s d st o po ed ha hesi Jo eph e Mai re , which y u

he t as u o wn. ut n on t t adop yo r B believi g , con rary , 1 9

t t ou t s t ut t o n u s ou ha y have hi grea a hori y yo r ide , y add f t t t t s , by way of Simple a ﬁrma ion , ha hi doctrine , su u ou wh ou li t o e h t mmed p by y , and ich y be eve b t a

‘ of i t t f t f . s s o t . o o so ar S Thoma , ha all radi ion Y u g “ as t o se e t s t the s u o f s t , in hi doc rine , plendo r a po i ive

' t ut —a trut sse the t st me s in r h , h confe d by g rea e na t t u ut s heology hro gho all ag e .

But t ! is no t t s ss t as wha hi a er ion , I have already s ou s tt s the t hown y in my econd le er, preci ely con rary t o th t the t s a the e s ss . doc rine of Fa her , pa ag e from S

as t t the tw o ss s . the Thom , in erpre ed by pa ag e from

S umma t s s the t to - the t , eache preci ely con rary doc rine which is in question ? The basis of the new doctrine of separate infalli “ b ilit is t s u s t has y hi do ble propo i ion The Pope , in the u the tu the s s Ch rch , pleni de of power and Bi hop ” the ur s the su have , in Ch ch , no hare in preme power . If the ﬁrst of these tw o propositions is found every

h s s . as t e is where , and e pecially in S Thom , econd found nowhere and the contrary t o this second pro

s t is u s . po i ion fo nd everywhere , and e pecially in S

Thomas .

s t i t the s s ust Now , for epara e infall bili y, Bi hop m

h r ' in the su needs have no s a e preme power . This last proposition being ins upportable and unheard of, n ll l t we must say the same of s ep arate i fa ibi i g .

VI .

But we must follow o ut here the consequences of h t e ss r . s u s i eu pa ag e f om S Thoma pon which , Mon e g n r, 20

you found your theolog ical argument : Papa ' hab e t i u n ple nitudine m pont ﬁ c alis pote st atis q asi rex in reg o . ‘ Episcopi ante m assumuntur in partem sollicitudi nis ” i u iti quasi j udices Sing ulis civit at b s praepo s .

u t o u s ss . s Thi pa ag e from . S Thoma , q o ed by y , Mon

se u at the u tt ig ne r, beg inning of yo r le er, and which

' compares the Pope in the midst O f the Bishop s t o a k the st his su t s s s t o tt ing in mid of bjec , eem me li le

rt o f th f s ts e us o . wo hy g eni S Thoma , and in i elf

s u s ss 1 re fal e and nbecoming . Thi pa ag e , have al ady s is no t u the S umma t aid , fo nd in , in which nei her are the s ssa s o f the Thes aurus t o u fal e pa g e Greek be fo nd , t u h f h D s in ti ns . i c o . x b t t e . o t e x in IV Book , chap f has it not e ssu the o . Now , cl arly i ed from pen S

s u the i u o f ss o f Thoma , nder nﬂ ence a forg ed pa ag e n h . s st u t tt u t o t e s S Chry o om , q o ed a li le f r her , in ame

D n t f th s t ons u st . I V. o e i i c i Book , q e ion xxiv

This last passag e is as follows . The author o f the Thes aurus t t o f Greek , ha forg er whom I

. s in m s tt poke y econd le er, and who deceived Pope —t s u t . s s Urban IV . , and con eq en ly S Thoma , hi forg er,

h o f s st uts s t e . peaking in name S John Chry o om, p

t the ut sus st t s s ss in o mo h of Je Chri , he e word addre ed

' “ t o S . Peter : Be thou the Head and Prince o f thy

t le t t sur bre hren ; and in my name and place , hem ‘ u t — s t u th t — le t ro nd hee , Thee , ea ed pon y hrone, and ‘ them shew thee and make thee known t o all the ” the peoples o f world .

ssu dl s has the s l st of the A re y, who oever ma le idea

f s st o f his us o . C g eni S hry o om , and epoch” will

22 sugg ested alre ady these p ag an and A siatic imag es to

‘ the forg ers of the t welfth and thirt eenth centuries

t c the t t Af er whi h , we ﬁnd madmen in nine een h c ntu tr u t s t s e ry , in od cing in o conver a ion , nay , even teaching and writing t hese unimaginable doctrines that the Pope is the Eucharist the Pope is the Holy

t t t the has the t t o s a the Spiri ha Pope rig h y, I am

the T ruth and the t t the ust Way , , . Life ha world m at t t u t t the is t t leng h be a g h wha Pope , and ha this century is destined to accomplish for the mys t er the t t w the a e Ar us y of Papacy , ha hich g Of i did fo r the divinity o f Jesus Christ that the Bishops ought by deg rees to be reduce d t o become

ss s o f the t t s as the commi arie Pope ha , by deg ree , in

t s t ss s u t to French Monarchy , he e g rea va al o g h be di

s st the o the s u mini hed, whil p wer Of Pope ho ld ever increase that the Councils are a useless di sturbance t at o ne t s ss s the s se h Of he e a emblie , in word of Jo ph

‘

st u o ur a e t s tu . de Mai re , wo ld be for g a g rea mi for ne DO we no t se e growing before o ur eyes the thoug ht of the suppression o f the Councils ? Do we no t hear it said This Council o f the Vatican will be the last ” Of the Councils ! The era of. Councils is at an end .

t s has t no t e t m t In hi one , here been a d er ina ion before hand t o smother all the freedom Of the Bishops ? “ Could it be true that it has b e en said We are abo ut ‘ t o t e a r the s s t u ak way f om Bi hop , by an excellen reg ’ lation,the power o f doing wrong ( la liberte da mat)

Is it not to s t t st v us my elf ha a Prie , a man ery pio ,

e r al us l f s t v y ze o , very we l in ormed, aid and repea ed 23

t s s : Ye s t is u the t man he e word , here pon ear h a ‘ who can say : I am the Holy It is to myi s th t - s e d so s elf a a monk , well known , and de erv ly , aid I adopt every thing which yo u have just enumerate d ” It is t o s l t t st u e and blamed . my e f ha a mo hono rabl

t t t s uss u t s t Ca holic wri er, af er a di c ion pon hi poin ,

t tt to t as us t ue t s wro e a long le er main ain , pio and r , hi “ ” i h u st proposition : The Pope s t e E chari . They write that “we all know with certainty only

‘ t t t no s one Single hing , namely, ha man know any ‘ t t t the t m hing excep on—e alone , excep man wi h who is r the s the t u ts God for eve , man who hear ho gh of

t s sts God . Every hing con i in following ” 1 ﬁrmly his inspired directio ns . “ But listen t o this : The Sovereig n Po ntiﬂ is the ‘ third visible presence of Jesus Christ among st us . He is the visible Shadow which emanates ‘ from the invisible head o f the Church in the Holy

t is fo r us our Sacramen The Pope , in

u t t t w the t is whole cond c , ha hich Holy Sacramen for

our t s f his f c as . st o adora ion The my ery o ﬁ e , Vicar, resembles the mystery o f the Holy Sacrament the ‘ tw o st s t t so t o sa o ne t the my erie are in er wined , y, wi h ‘ other O ne might as well try t o be a g ood Christian without devotion t o the Blessed wi t u t n t th as t o e . Virg in , ho devo io Pope The de ‘ vo tion to the Pope is an essential part of Christian ‘ piety ; an indispe nsable element of all Christian ‘ holiness . The way in which the Pope

1 ’ . Veuillo L ll i n i e 9 t I us o l béral . 14 L . , p . 24

‘ represents God; is as if heaven were a lways Open ‘ his and t t S te hen ' he saw J sus above head , ha , like p , e ‘ t he t o f the t On rig h hand Fa her . We ‘ must no t allow ourselves any cowardly doubts upon

t t s his s t t tu ha which concern overeig n y , ei her Spiri al

o r t fo r his t t is t s a t emporal , emporal royal y i elf a p r

O f our o ur relig ion . We must no t allow ‘ selves the di srespectful disloyalty of disting ui shing in ‘ his st — t t t w e him and mini ry , be ween ha which may ‘ s u t t con ider h man , and ha which we may acknowledg e ” divine .

But t is it who s us t s who , hen, bring hi new reli

? It is ss t n a t t o st gion no le ha doc or in he log y, prie o f the O t at t he us t ra ory London , pio and wor hy

t s t t O n D evotion to Fa her Faber, in a ermon en i led ” h P Y s t s is t e t s . e op e . Everybody may verify hi hi

t the us as t u st i t t wha blind bring r e Chri ian y I hink ,

he s o f s s h M r. t O t g , Bi hop rlean wri e very mildly w en “ he calls this foolish and culpable tendency R o manis m ”

n mad It is the t u ss o f st t . g o e . very forg e f lne Chri iani y It is the contempt o f the Gospel and o f our Lord

u st Jes s Chri .

VII .

W ho does no t se e that on all sides they are labour he ing to Obscure the Episcopate Do yo u no t se e t new deﬁnition Of the Church which a great number “ o f Roman theolog ians have adopted The Church is the company o f the faithful who have as their ” ‘ st the on t ? headJesus Chri in heaven , and Pope ear h

But in what sense

( 3 ) In the sense that they enter upon a share ~ of the s tu i n arte m s ll itud ni olici de p o ic i s . ( 4) And that they have no Share in the supreme w po er.

O f t e s u os t s the st two est the h e fo r prop i ion , la d roy

‘ ‘ st t wo t at is ! it is to the st two ﬁr , h all Now , la ;

M se e u t t ou tie u s f is on ig n r, ha y yo r el The Pope

th ts F r the s e s s su . o overeig n , and Bi hop are bjec if Bishops have the smallest share in the supreme power nd the C u all the ume t ls to the u . in h rch , arg n fal g ro

. The soverei gnty must b e entirely in the Po pe the

‘ s s the s t ust a t in the Bi hop , Epi copa e , m h ve no par sovereig nty otherwise yo u can no lo nger construct

anyt hing upon this major z Where - the sovereignty ” is t is t , here infallibili y .

s u u i i st t Therefore , Mon eig ne r, yo r op n on , clearly a ed , “ is in effect this The Bishops in the Church have h w ” no Share in t e Supreme po er .

s u st s 1 ask we Are Thi f lly e abli hed, where are

the t C u h ? Is t e the we in Ca holic h rc her in world , a

est t st matt r t s t Pri , a Ca holic , a Chri ian , of no e wha ec ,

— t the ‘ is here in whole world a man , who, having

h u s n has e r t s heard t e Ch rch poke of, ver hea d hi won der proclaimed O ug ht no t an universal rising o f consciences t o reply t o this astonishing attempt t o chang e the constitution “ ” the u ? sa tus al o f Ch rch The empire , id Taci , lowed the names O f the old magistracies to remain “ ” ‘ ’ uum v ula s Eademmag is trat ocab . The name Of Bi hop 27

‘ m i s ssu and the u s re a n a redly, name of Co ncil

u s b ut t s the sc t b e wo ld remain al o , wha doe Epi opa e

t the u s the sh s come , wha do Co ncil become , if Bi op ,

t t or s s no s in whe her congreg a ed di per ed , have hare the supreme power ?

W t is it t t I ask t t at s ha ha Wha , hen , do C holic

s s ask ? ask t t u s who e eye are open , They ha Co ncil s ul no t s the s t st ho d be aboli hed , nor Epi copa e de royed . Is this demand on the part Of Christianity an ex c e ssive s u o ne ? , ra h , or c lpable

W t ! o ne u o e t o t t s ha wo ld be blig d accep hi pag e , w ut t o t s e o f u tt t o th hich I am abo ran crib , yo r le er e

s o f O s to se e ‘ it the t o f th Bi hop rlean , and in ype e g overnment o f the Church “ Here is the pag e The thesis of Muzzarelli recurs to i u t t s t es s w me ag a n here , and I q o e ag ain hi h i , hich

‘ ’ cannot be refuted He is and must be held personally

u s s ut t s s infallible , who prono nce ab ol e dog ma ic deci ion ,

u s s ss s t e to the t ul p bli he and addre e h m all fai hf , and

to the t s t t ut re u1r1n th all Ca holic Epi copa e , wi ho q g e ‘ t i t ss o r t t s t the direc or ind rec , expre ed aci , con en of ‘ s s b ut t t o u li s Bi hop , by commanding hem p b h and ‘ ut his s s t m to n exec e deci ion , and forbidding he infri g e ‘ t or s t o s t u hem , ra hly oppo e hem , nder pain Of ex ‘ u t u i so fac to st the comm nica ion inc rred p , re raining ‘ Bishops who should attempt to discuss and j udg e his ‘ s s t st t t e s no t t t deci ion , and pro e ing ha he do awai heir ‘ ' suﬂra e s b ut s u t as hi g , enjoin pon hem obedience , s ‘ ss s the u predece or in Holy See have done , d ring a ‘ u s o f tur s no t t ut an long co r e cen ie , only wi ho y O bje c 28

‘ t fr the C u b ut W t the s t the ion om h rch , i h con en of ‘ s u l s su ss to t he su Univer al Ch rch , a way bmi ive preme " ut t Of the st the s u o f a hori y Holy See , whil mall n mber " s s the t nl the Bi hop who did con rary, o y remained in ‘ bosom o f the Church by atoning for their murmurs ‘ ’ sit t u ts s s t r r . and oppo ion , by heir exc e and heir eg e

I VII .

u t u s u u al of S ch , hen , wo ld be , Mon eig ne r, yo r ide the Papacy Well I am about to show you this ideal in action

ou f st . to o in hi ory I am g oing demand of y , all

t st s o f the t u t s is the Ca holic Prie , and all fai hf l , if hi ideal which they wish for.

‘ A t s s u to S ou the f erward , Mon eigne r, I hope how y

t u a su as the e st t ut the r e ide l, ch divin in i ion, and

sus st st s it Words o f Je Chri e abli hed for ever .

t as s sto is the Of the Here , hen , een in hi ry, power

su as u it t Holy See , ch M zzarelli imagined . Tha

’ ut t o u t is b ut which I am abo q o e one example .

t s t o s B ; There would be o her how al so . ut every u h t is u u . tt t t e hing fo nd in a B ll of Pa l IV , a emp ing , in s xt tu to s l t its t t i h cen ry, di p ay, in fac , in all ex en and

its s u s ' t s su o ntiﬁ c al all con eq ence , hi preme p power, such as the school o f bewilderment and error dreams it to be even now .

is the s s o f t s Bu o f at Here analy i hi ll , which I g ive , th t t t e . i the s t m u . s ame i e , ex en ire Pope Pa l IV de red

t t the u s u u s the ha B ll ho ld be p bli hed , and read by all

1 e l to the is rleans . 23 R p y B hop of O , p .

f t ts and t ut t r ss the ss o f ac i elf, wi ho o her leg al p oce , lo

all u - ut t a t hono r, all power, all a hori y, every princip li y,

u w u d chy , king dom , empire , and ill be for ever nable But and o f su t . t incapable re ming hem , moreover, hey ‘ ust s as havin rela s ed into heres as m be con idered g p y,

th n e the s t as if ey were co demn d for econd ime , if,

' alre ad c onvict e d of s t r being y here y , hey had al eady it u it t b t . abj red , and hen have fallen ack ag ain in o

t t t t ust to he From ha momen , hey m be delivered t

s u so as to u s t o ec lar arm , be p ni hed according law,

Unl ss t t t u ta t t the m e ha , r ly repen n , hey may, by cle ency

and ss the b e s t to st g oodne of Holy See , en a mona ery ,

t to o n and t fort he st here do penance , bread wa er, re l o f t s . ust e as heir ive They m , mor over , be reg arded t t relapsed here ics by all men of every condi ion . They

ust t t as su as su and‘ de rive d m be rea ed ch , avoided ch , p

o f all the consolations of humanity .

I nd as to the s st ne ﬁ s s ss V. A eccle ia ical b e c e p os e ed

t t il u t s at the by hem , hey w l be conferred pon o her t t appoin ed ime .

A s t s s v . to to V ho e who hall dare recei e , defend ,

f u the af s ut c avo r condemned ore aid , p onﬁdence in

t t t t t s t u t s s hem, en er ain heir doc rine , hey inc r hem elve

i s o facta the s t o f t p en ence excommunica ion . They

s v r ri ht of u e . will be declared infamo , deprived of e y g ,

‘ the t of te st ‘ w in righ giving imony, of making a ill, of

“

he ritin . N0 one s t t n o r is u to g owe hem any hi g , bo nd

1 or a rela se into eres the c astisement was unis ment e t out F p h y, h p h by fir wi h remissi n e en en sincere re entance was certain b ut for t ese fi ctit ous o , v wh p ; h i ses Paul I roclai s ere a miti ationfi l relap V. p m h g 3 1

' ns to t ' in n t t b e respo ible hem a y hing . If hey are

u s t e r s t s u e s t r a J dg e , h i en ence are n ll Lawy r , hei p t t e t es the a ts o r in ronag e canno be rec ived No ari , c

' strume nts u t are ff t and drawn p by hem of no e ec ,

' o f t are s s t s deprived all force if hey Bi hop , Pa riarch ,

at s nc s i s , t e r o t s t Prim e , Pri e , or K ng , h i p r per ie , heir

ns t e s e me u t domai , h ir king dom , b co p blic proper y, and

t ‘ t st u t rovide d the u t given over o he ﬁr occ pan , p occ pan

the t un t o f the . n be in fai h , i y , obedience Holy Roma

Church .

t t at t it VI . To which we add, ha if ever, any ime, is di sc e t s A s t over d hat a Bi hop , rchbi hop , Prima e ,

it the P tif ms o e were even Roman on f hi elf, had , bef r

' ' his t s an de viat ion f o promo ion , fallen into here y, or y r m the t t su one ust t t Ca holic fai h , ch an m know ha , from

t his r t n his r t u hencefor h , o dina io and p omo ion are n ll ,

ff t i t s t ss . s wor hle , of no e ec He nei her Bi hop , Cardi

the ts st t s u t o s nal, nor Pope , and all ac , mini ra ion , f nc i n ,

s s u s s ts ad st at s ut word , di co r e , ac of mini r ion , are ab ol ely

u no t f 'o n o ne t t n ll and void , and do con er any any i le t ‘ or righ .

. t ust b e d u as s VII And hey m all looke pon pag an ,

u s t s p blican , here ic .

” s s . t t VIII Now, we decree all hi , any apo olic con

stitution t t st t i no wi h anding , any o her decree g ven in a

' l W hence it ll s t at if it ere disc ere t at a is or e en 9. P e fo ow h , w ov d h B hop, v op , ' e re his r m ti n had in an wa e iate r m the Catholic ait he ul b fo p o o o , y y d v d f o f h , wo d b e ne it er Priest nor is m a e i e o o . The Priests w he s l r a l h B h p ho hou d h v o d n d , w u d not b e Priests the sts ic t ese latter b elie in t ems el es Prie sts s ul ; Ho wh h h , v g h v , ho d a e c nsecrate ul not a e b een c nsecrate and the a s lutions h v o d, wo d h v o d ; b o which ms P ests t ese anto ri s ul a e i en w ul not b e a soluti ns . h ph of ho d h v g v , o d b o 3 2

t s s notW 1thst andin t nk con rary en e g , of cer ai nowledg e,

in the lenitude o A os tolic ower t and p f p p , any ar icle of

law t the Cor us J W is s con ained in p , any promi e , or even

t t . tt ur any oa h , aken by no ma er whom , even by O t t a s s t s . t s o te elve , no wi h nding To all hi we der g a ‘ " x ss b ut this alone for t s o o . e pre ly, for , and hi nce nly

And . t IX . w e desire that all hose to whom it

o s t o f t s A st l tt s bel ng ake cog nizance he e po o ic Le er , and

th t t f t o the s o f the s li S i a hey, be a ﬁxed door Ba i ca of

te t o the a st t o the Cam us Pe r, Ch ncery Apo olic, and p

' ‘ L t ' . e o ne t to s X no , hen , dare oppo e in any way

t s u r o f u the o f hi decree , nde pain inc rring ang er m t G o d h f t st s . t o e o . Al ig h y , and Ap le S Pe er and S u Pa l .

IX ;

is st s the ts . s u The e are fac Here , Mon eigne r, a mo

s u is t o tu s olemn B ll which be perpe al , and which mark o ut fo r ever the g reat hne s of the g overnment o f

n t s uss t t s u is human societies . I do o di c whe her hi B ll

is not . ex cathedra s o ne s t ex or , ince no know wha

r t f he t st cathed a means . I say that it is an ac o t g rea e

s t act m tu t u Con olemni y, an a rely delibera ed pon in sist o r i u us the s y, S gned nanimo ly by all Cardinal , addressed t o the w hole Church and even to the whole huma s u the t u the ut n race , impo ing pon all fai hf l , d y o f believing that t he Pope is the master o f all the " s t t the o f s s the king dom , ha crime here y bring down

u s t d t t s at i so p ni hmen of ea h , and ake away once , p

u t c t i t t h t bro g h ba k wi hin s proper limi s . By w a m s ? n t o the c s t is to sa ean By obedie ce anon , tha y,

o the s o f the u t law Ch rch . T i th t d s s e ut . t is t s e o G o hi r h And h , hank b t , l t ta o ne om to s. wil , mos cer inly , day c e pas

Ye s trul the at s of t e t o i , y, g e hell have ri d preva l

t r a i st the se e it . Ye s ru 1 no anc g a n Church we , ly , g e,

i u t e u violence , and pr de , every c pidi y , very f ry , every

ew e t he tes H ell as the b ild rmen , in one word , t g a of , s e ss s it d u to o thr Go pel xpre e , have en eavo red . ver ow and dishonour the Papacy b ut Hell will no t prevail

st it . t w us st as n a , s f u g ain Tha hich Je Chri h o ded ,

us will endure for ever . Jes Christ founded a centre

f t h rc . o uni y for His C u h. The world shall know its ut it s its it s u t it ss t bea y , power, g lory, h mili y , s nece i y ,

s its fruitfulne s.

s s u s tt ‘ s i Thi , Mon eig ne r , I hall a empt to ho w n a

‘ t t i t fourth letter . I do not wish to s op wi ht his cr icism

ur s t u s t w the u u an of o mi for ne , o hich a dacio s d violent pretensions o f fanaticism and illusion have fo rced me . to n the u : e . W e have d efe d Ch rch W have t o ” i s tu o f th P defend the Evang el cal in ti tion e apaey. r to unm t e l We have mo e and more ask , o xpe the h dde e em o is k ln u W e t win s i n n y Wh . ili g s, 119 n ss himelf around the Church and the Pap acy like a serpent h ! h t e f t of o ur t e . A e s our d around h ee Mo h r y , id en

s i n m is f w h . The ar e o n , he om S Ber ard a d y , e e y ’ 3 5

‘ f t u t t b e c ause the r ha ef l both o heaven and ear h , y have lain hands on bo th Invisi c aelo -terraeu

' u ri in r quia t que manus je c e e . a O ur hidden ene my is that spirit which S . Bern rd

‘ still apostrophises in those t erms which Fenelon

ts t t u art the repea Go , hen , and if ho Empire , dare

to s the t shi t u art A st eize Apos le p ; or if ho an po le ,

' ‘

t o usu th t are forb idden ou . dare rp e Empire . Bo h y

‘ If o u s t o s oth o u s t y de ire eize b , , y will lo e bo h

’ tu e t t usu u aut mi ns I erg o , ibi rpare a de do na

‘

a o sto atum aut o stolic us do minatum. p l , ap Plane ab ‘ alt erutro roh b eris . utrum ue si u h p i , , Si q m l abere ‘ s s utrum u e . vole , perde q

’

. Be rnar added an e ts : S d , d F nelon repea How ‘ s t u e t s s t o . long do t ho hid from hy elf, and refu e ‘ understand the murmur o f the ' whole world

Quousque murmur uni verses ~ terree aut dissimulas ” 3 aut non advertis

‘ O ur is the s t saw enemy, piri which Melchior Cano

st s d ss to the cha i ed in Rome , when he ad re ed King of Spain the wonderful memorial which I ' dare no t

t s t t s s u the ran la e here , in w hich I ﬁnd he e word pon Curia Ro mana : Mal c ono z e a Roma,quien pretende ” “ ” a mu n t s r i s B a l n s s . . C av b o e m et non e t a a a anarla y ,

' Enz inas d s A d o I n rma s n ice . o tion 1 85 7 . e ( , f , pp , p The enemy is the spirit which the Council of Con

st w as u to ri out it ance endeavo ring d ve , when de — l S ernard De Co rat on Li 1 . nside i s . b iv. ca 1 . B . , p

2 n l - — Fé e on. De A to itat ac e S ammi P an a . xi n r D Co i i r . er a ns l . t c S . e d b , p B d, , u i a ca . v . c iii . . , p , p

8 erna i ii r loo c t li . iii . 3 . . . b . ca . B d, , p 3 6

. ' mande d the reform o f the Church in the Ca ria R o mana : Reformatio Ecclesiae in Curia

' r r Romana . The eform o f t he Ca ia Romana is that

the su e ff ts o f the u s o f which pr me e or Co ncil , and even th s e t . i s on Pope , have never ob ained The r decree , t s t t u er t: hi poin , are rampled nd foo

, i ' ' o ur n is ut to de ath J e sus In a word , e emy he who p

‘ C st our st His hri ! and whom beloved Ma er, in divine

t ss s t o u su th His g en lene , never cea ed p r e wi divine di t in g na ion . “ s He t o His st s e o f Above all , aid apo le , bewar

the o f the s s u t leaven Phari ee . Woe n o ‘ o u s ! fo r t the ke y , Lawyer ye have aken away y of

‘ ' t not ourselve s and t m knowledg e ye en ered in y , he ‘ in oe that were entering ye hindered . W

u t o u s s fo r s ut u the o f n o y , Phari ee ye h p king dom

' st t o in o urse lf heaven ag ain men ; for ye nei her g y , ” 1 ‘ ff n neither su er ye them that are entering to g o i .

But sus s t is the of s the Je Chri King Ag e , Head and

the t r ss the um Principle of mig h y prog e of h an race .

h k o f He g ives t o His Church t e ey knowledg e, He

i s t o it the s ll n t g ve key of heaven, and He wi bri g in o

‘ His king dom the me n whom the enemy desires t o hinderfrom entering in .

— — Matt e i . 13 . x i S uke xi . 5 2 S . 8 . uke l . 1 . 1 L , . L , . h w, xxi i

3 8

e t e ric ulo sam ss ut t x us ui vem , p e e , Pon ife Roman , q

Dei e t D i i st e su r st s t t s om n no ri J Ch i i vice g eri in erri , e t su t s e t le nit udine m ob tine t t s per g en e , regna p po e t t s o mne s ue udic at sac u u a i , q j , a nemine in hoc c lo j di

' us o ssit si de rehe ndatur ﬁde de vius u cand , p , p a , redarg i , e t u ub i us inte nditur u u e st le nius q od maj peric l m ibi p , e t dili entius c o nsule ndum ne se udo ro he tae aut g , , p p p

t sae culare m urisdic tio ne m hab e nte s s alii e iam j , impli c ium s mise rab ilit e r illa ue e nt innumerab ile s ue anima q , q

u s e o rum s irit ualib us aut t e m oralib us u se pop lo , in p p , c r e t re imini c o mmisso s s u erditio ne m e t g , ec m in p , dam natio nis interitum trahant ali uando t t no s , nec q con ing a ab o minatione m de solationis uae t e st , q dic a a Daniele

ro he t a in s ot vide re c u ie nt e s u tu p p , s loco an o , p , q an m c um ssu us st mune re ast ul s Deo po m , pro no ro p orali v pe vine am n de moliri sata e nte s e t u Domi i g capere , r po

o vilib us arc e re ne s ut vide amur ne ueunte s ab , cane m i q

t e t e rdamur c um s a ric olis la rare , p mali g , ac mercenario c ompare mur

Habita super hi s c um v e ne rab ilib us fratrib us no stri E din ' s . . . c ar ahb us delib e ratio ne matura de S R , , c c s e t u asse n u me s e t sin ulas orem on ilio , nanimi s , o n g

- e xc ommunic ationis sus e nsio nis e t inte rdict i . ac a p , priv tionis e t uasvis s s te t s su s e t eenas a , q alia en n ia , cen ra , p

uib usvis s o ntiﬁc ib us rae de c e sso rib us no stris q Romani p p ,

' aut t ahb us hab itis t e o rum litte ras pro , e iam per ex trava ant e s se u sac ris conc iliis s re c e tis g , ab Eccle ia Dei p ,

s t u t u de c re tis e t statutis aut sac ris vel anc or m Pa r m , ,

Canonib us c o nstitutio nib us e t o rdinatiohib us s , ac , apo 39

' ut s hismatic os uomo do lib et tolic is contra haeret ic os, a c q

t as e t ro mul atas st auc to rit ate a rob amus la p g , apo olica pp ,

. t r inn vamus r tu o b se rvari e t ob e o , ac pe pe o , in vividi servantia si s e a s t re oni et ss e , for an in non in , p , e e d bere

e cnon uo sc um ue ui hacte nus ﬁ de c atholic a n q q , q a

ass aut ali uam haere s1m i t aut s hi s devi e , in q nciden , c ma

n u r t e x citab unt se u tt t e t ss i c r en , vel , commi en , devia e , seu ss aut inc urrisse t ss seu incidi e , vel exci a e , com misisse de rehe nde ntur aut c onﬁte b untur sen co nvin p , ,

tu cu uscum ue st tus us di s c o nditionis cen r, j q a , grad , or ni , ,

' e t rae emine ntiae st t et s p exi an , iam Epi copali , Archi

s Patriarchali Primitiali aut di epi copali , , , alia majori g

nitate s st seu Cardi nalatus e t s Eccle ia ica , honore , Apo

t es e s ub ivis lo c orum t am er e tuae u olic S di , , p p q am

t m s t s mune re u e t e porali leg a ioni , vel m ndana iam

t u e t Comi ali , Baronali , Marchionali , D cali , Reg ia

auc t o ritate se u e xc elle ntia raeful e ant e t Imperiali , p g ,

e o rum ue mlib e t s t t s su s e t os s ee q en en ia , cen ra , p na pr

inc urr re v lumus t u dictas e o a q e de c e rnimus .

Et nihilominus c onside rante s di num ss ut g e e ,

ui v t ut s s st t tu ee na q ir i amore a mali non ab inen , me p

‘ rum l is de te rre antur e t u s ab i l , q od Epi copi , Archi

s t es t s s at epi copi , Pa riarch , Prima e , Cardinale , Leg i ,

t s s Marchione s u s s e t Comi e , Barone , , D ce , Reg e

Im e rato re s ui s e t s o ut p , q alio docere illi bono exempl ,

ﬁde cathohc a c ontine antur ss de b e nt rse varic ando in , e e , p

ravius ceeteris t c um s u sei s o s g peccan , non ol m p

t u t aho s innume rab ile s u perdan , ver m e iam pop los

c u u es et re imini cre dito s seu s e is sub dito s or m c r , g , alia , 40

s um erditio ne m ute um inte ritus t b t de ec in p , in p ra an ,

s i us s o e t asse nsu hac nos tra in er etaam imil b con ili , , p p

valitara cons titutione u t t c r1m1n1s uo nu , in odi m an i , q l lum 1 11 es us aut ernic io sius ss t st Eccl ia Dei maj , p e e po e ,

de a os tolzcce otes tatis lenitudine s ancimus s tatuimus p p p , ,

decerii imas et de nimus u se nt e ntiis c e nsuris e t ﬁ , q od ,

asnis rae dic tis suo o e t e fﬁc acia remane ntib us p p in rob re , ,

effe c tum suu sortie ntib us s e t sin uli ac m , omne , g

s s t es r tes C Epi copi , Archiepi copi , Pa riarch , P ima , ardi nale s ti t s s Marchio ne s Du s , Leg a , Comi e , Barone , , ce ,

s e t Im e rat o re s ui hac te nus ut rse fe rtur Reg e p , q , p ,

e ss aut i n hae re sim ss se u s s u d via e , incidi e, chi ma inc r

ss t ss c o mmisisse de re hensi aut ss ri e , exci a e vel p , confe i , aut c onvic ti fuerint e t o sterum de viab unt aut , in p , in haere sim t se u s s u r t e xc it ab unt inciden , chi ma inc r en , vel , aut t t t e t ss se u in hazre sim ss commi en , devia e , incidi e ,

' se u schisma inc urrisse aut it ss se u c o mmisisse , exc a e , de re hende ntur aut c o nﬁte b untur se u c o nvinc entur p , , , c um inex cusab iho re s t s re ddantur u t in hoc ce eri , l ra s t t s su s e t asm s rse dic tas s t t a e o en en ia , cen ra p a p , in e i m

s s u ue u s aut fa t st su s ip o , ab q e aliq j ri , c i mini erio , i o rdinib us e t c athe dralib us t me tro olitanis , e iam p

P at riarc halib us e t Primatib us Ec cle siis , , ac Cardina

tus e t c u us vis t s mune re ne c no n' la honore , j Leg a ioni ,

t e t ass o mni ue e auc toritate voce ac iva , p iva , q , ac mo naste riis b e ne ﬁ c iis e t o fﬁciis e c cle siasticis c um , , ,

u e t ' s u saecularib us e t uo rumvis o rdinum c ra, ine c ra, , q re ularib us uae e x uib usv1s c o nc e ssio nib us e t g , q q , dis e nsatio nib us st s - titulum n e t p apo olici in , comme dam administratrione m aut s uo mo dolibe t o b tinue rint , alia q ,

‘ auc torit ate e t ex c ellentia ollentib us ha er tractari , p b i , ; ‘ “ ’ ‘ et re utari et at tales sc itari omni ue hamanitatis p , q s ciatic destitui d b ait t e e .

' ' ' ‘ Et ur us atrOnatus aut no minandi e s nas q j p , p r o

do as ad C athe drales et m M t t as et i ne , ia e ropoli an

at ar s ac m t s l s s seu Monaste ria P ri chale , Pri a iale Ecc e ia , , ve l b e neﬁcia s ast rivatio ne m hu us alia eccle i ica , per p j

‘ niodi v ti raetende rint ne a diutinae acan a habere p , ill

‘ ‘ v aCationis e X onantur ir mo mmo dis sed de s e rvitute p , .

‘ ' ' hae re tico rume reptapersonis conc e dantur ido ne is quae illarum‘ 1 populos in semitas justitiae ﬁdelite r dirig ent ;

‘ ‘ t e ne antur l s s Mo nasteria e t b e neﬁ c ia hu us , ad Ecc e ia , j

' ‘ s so as s r t us ure vel modi alia per n idonea inf a emp a j ,

e orum co nc o rdatis se u c omac t atis cum ta ex , p dic Sede

‘ ‘ t s st tutu s seu ro t m e e xiste nti Ro ini i a m , Nobi p e p re

mnci Pontiﬁ c i ressentare alio uin te re hu us; a , p , q mpo j

ela so e t Ec cle siarum onas modi p plena , libera , M

t e rio rum e t Be ne ﬁ c io rum raedic torum s s t , p di po i io ad

No s e t m u Po ntiﬁ c e m rae dic tum e o s e , Ro an m p ip o pl no

u lv tur j re de vo a .

' Et insuper qu1 1psos sic deprehenso s aut c0 n~

' f sses vel con c t s s t uo modo lib e t re c e tare e , vi o cien er q p ,

Ve l f e aut e is fave re seu e orum de end re , , vel credere ,

o mata! do matiz are raesum serint se ntentiam ex? d g g p p ,

‘ communic ationis so incurrant e fﬁ c iantur ue ih ex ip , q

' f m s s a scri tis v'el nuntio aut ro a e , nec voce , per on , p , p

cu at ali uo u seu vat ofﬁcia aut r ore q ad p blica, pri a ,

c s l a seu S no dum C iu e vel on i i , y vel oncil m g en rale , 43

r o e C ardinalium aut ali ue m p ovinciale , nec C nclav , q

ﬁ de liumw c on re atione m seu ele c tionemv alic u us aut g g , j , t st u e rhib endum admittantur admitti e imoni m p , nec

o ssint : s t t inte stab ile s haere dit atis p in e iam , nec ad suc ce ssione m ac c e dant u us raete re a c o atur eis , n ll p g

l n r u i super a iquo negotio re spo de e u Q od s forsan

u s e xtiterint e orum s te t ae nullam o b tine ant j dice , en n i

ﬁ rmitate m ne c ali uae uses ad e orum audie ntiam , q ca de duc antur e t si fue rint advo c ati e orum tr u , , pa ocini m nullat enus tu si T ab ellio nes ex titerint recipia r, vero , instrumenta c onfe c ta per e o s nullius sint penitus ro b oris

Et su o us e t sin u i vel momenti . in per cl rici omnib g l s

Ec c le siis t Cathe dralib us Me tro oht anis uPa , e iam , p ,

triarchalib us e t Primatialib us di nitatib us s , ac g , Mona

i n ﬁ iis e t o fﬁciis Ec le siastici t t e ri s , b e e c c s ut , , , . e iam

roefe rt ur ualiﬁ c atis e o s ' uomo dohb e t ob t entis p , q per q ,

e t tam s ua et ut raemittitur ualiﬁ ip i , q m laici , iam, p , q

t e t di nitatib us raedic tis raediti uib uscum ue ca i , g p p q q

Re nis Duc atib us Dominiis s e t s g , , , Fendi boni tempo

ralib us e o s o sse ssis t st t e o s per p priva i exi an ip o ,

Re na ue u tus i Fe uda e t o hu us g q , D ca , Domin a, , b na j

ub lic e ntur et ublica sint e ciantur ae uris et modi p , p ﬁ g j ,

ro rietatis eorum UI I L A P IM O CC UPAVERINT p p , Q L R O ,

in rit ate ﬁde i e t unitat i in s ce e . . s . sub st , S R E ac no ra,

e t suc c e ssorum nostrorum Ro manorum Po ntiﬁ cum

t r tium ie ntia fu t c o no nic e in an ob e d e rin .

A dj 1cie nte s quod si ullo unquam tempore ap parue rit alique m Episc o pum etiam pro Archiepiscopo

se u Patriarcha t se ere nte m aut rae dic t , vel Prima e g , p ae 44

Ro ma nae s ae . C ardinale m t ut raefe rtur Eccle i , e iam p ,

L atum se n a e tiam u Pontiﬁc e m t u eg , Roman m an e ej e

' ro motione m in Cardinale m se u u P n p vel , Roman m o t ﬁ c e m assum tione m ﬁ de c atholic a de viasse ‘ aut i p a , in ali uam hse re sim ss ro motio se u assum tio q incidi e , p , p de

6 0 t m c o nc o rdi am e t u ommum e ia in , de nanimi cardi nalium asse nsu t u t e t e e xist at fac a , n lla , irri a, inani , nec

' ' susce tione m muneris c o nse cratio nis l aut sub se c u per p , t am re iminis e t administrationi s ss ss seu g , po e ionem ,

uas i sius Po ntiﬁ cis inthroniz atio ne m q i , vel p Romani , aut adoratione m se u e i rae stitam us , p ab omnib obe die ntiam e t c u usvis te m oris a ss s e orum , j p in pr emi i c onv aluisse di aut c onvale sc e re o ssit ci , p , nec pro

t ah ua sui a te hab e atur n ullam ue leg i ima in q p r , q t alib us in Episc o po s,se u Arc hie pisc opo s vel Patriarche s aut t s ro mo tis se u s um Prima e p , in Cardinale , vel Roman

Pontiﬁ c em assum tis s irit ualib us tem o ralib us p , in p , vel p

' administrandi fac ultat em tribuisse aut trib uere c e nse a tur se d e t s ul e o s uomo dohb et t , omnia ing a per q dic a ,

ta st e t administrat a s ut uee cum ue fac , g e a , ac inde ec a q q virib us c av e ant e t nullam sas ﬁ rmitat em us , pror , nec j alic ui trib uant sint ue s sic romoti e t assum ti e o , q ip i p , p ,

s s u ali ua de su e r fac ie nda de claratione ip o ab q e q p , omni

‘ n t t t tu auc torit ate o fﬁc io e t dig i a e , loco , honore , i lo , ,

t st t t lic e at ue us e t sin ulis sic po e a e priva i , q omnib , g

ro mo tis e t assum tis si ﬁ de t de viasse nt p , p , in an ea non ,

haere tic i u ss t u s s indurrissent aut nec f i en , neq e chi ma , m i n t ss t c om is sse t . exci a en , vel

- Sub ditis erso nis tam Cle ricis Sae c ularib us p , ,

uib usvis lausulis et dec re tis et tu e t q c , , iam mo proprio, d c rt s t a o st olic as o t e statis tudin e e a cien ia , ac de p p pleni e se t c onsisto rialite r ant s uomo dohb e t u e iam , alia q

c o c essis e t t it e ratis vic ib us a rob atis inno vatis n , e iam pp , , ac et am in u s clausis ne c non ui b usvis i corpore j ri , q

’ ‘ ca itulis Conclavis t u t aut c o nﬁ rmatio ne p , , e iam j ramen o ,

a sto ca uavis ﬁrmit at e l rob oratis e t po li , vel q a ia , per

no s s ur ti u u ipso j a s . Q ib s omnibus corum tenores

raese nt b us ro e ss s um p i p expr i , ac de verbo ad verb

in erti hab ent s llis a s suo e rmansuris s s e , i lia in robore p ,

hac ce dumtaxat s e cialite r e t e ss dero amus vi p , xpre e g ,

eteris ue c ntra iis i us um u c q o r qu b c q e .

Ut aute m praesente s literse adomnium quorum

’ te st no titiam de duc antur volumus e as se u e arum in re , , ,

tr sum m c ui u no tarii u sub sc ri to . e t an ptu ( man p blici p , sigillo alic ujus personae in dig nitate ecclesiastica con

stitutae u t le nam de m adhib e ri e de c erni m ni o , p ﬁ deb re

us s a Pri ci is A o stolorum r e t m ) in Ba ilic e n p p de U be ,

Chanc ellariae apo stolicas valvis, atque in acie campi Flores ah uo s c urso rib us no stris ub lic ari e t per q ex , p ,

’ afii i e arum ue m ni affi xam dimitti u -g g , , q copia i bi , p blica i n e i ne m e t O ia f xes dimissionem fi C e , t o emqu af x o , p a fi

hu usmo di sufﬁ c e re e t sole mni e t t m b e ’ j , pro leg i ima ha ri; i ub lic atio ne m re u ri aut ex e c tari . nec aham p q , p debere

o i h l e a Nulli erg o mn no ominum. ic t hanc

‘ as r atio i inno vat o is nct is n o n , i n a ion pag inam ostr app b a , s ,

s t r a i n -volunt ate m decretoru nfr n ers ta uti; de og t o is , mi i g ; vel ei ausu Si quis s autem hoe 4 7

tt t raesum s e rit indi natione m o ni o te ntis a en are p p , g m p

Be at o rum e t u a stolorum e us se Dei , ac P ri et Pa li po j m no ve rit incursuru .

tu ae a u Pe trum Inc ar Da m Rom , pud Sanct m anno natio ni s as i e uin ua e sii o Dominic m ll simo q q g n nono ,

M r ii a t . t . XV . Kal . Pon nostri anno IV .

E o A L c at o c i u ae s s e sc 0 s . g P U US , h li Eccle ia p p E B LLAY i ti n o J o . S e sc o s O s e s . T g E U , p pu E i o R . ar E CO RPo e sc o us P rtue n . T g c d. D , p p o i E . PI ANU o . S S e sc o u u u s s . T g F card , p p T c lan

E o Fe d . C O ESIUS e isc o us Pr n ae e st . T g , card , p p

e iscO us A l n T p p b a e n . T

- E R . A o . I L I P nit ae . T g , card S NCT ANGE , major E T o . . I PU . T g , card CR S S

E F L VI P rusinu o U US . e s . T g , card

E o H . ar o s I . S ac e nus T g J M C , card .

E . t t o o s . s T g J , card Sanc i Vi ali . E A Pu u o . . t e s T g J , card .

H R . Im l I . o en . T Ego E , card E B o . . T g , card Tranen .

E o MED A I . ri n n a e . T g D O ES , card

E o i IPI . P s r a um. T g SC O , card .

. r R um nu . TJ0 8 ca d . o a s

os . I . t Panc r tii T J ANTON US , card Sanc i a . E T H . o . addus G . T g , card E G o I . . t . T g V R , card de Spole o

E o . M. T g F , card . Alexan .

o O LE MO LIANU A r S . aec . T Eg . , card 48

E A D o G . s . m . Ca . g , iac , card

E o ~H . . t . g , card de Sermone a E o ll r . a e u g J ca d S b s . E o I . . t G o r n: g H ER , card Sanc i g E o IRM. t g , card . de Mon e . E o L . . us . g A OY , card Corneli E o C . . g , card Carafa . E A o rr n . s. g o , card Nepoli E V I LL o TE TI c . O US t us. g , ard Vi elli E o J o . AP A n ili I . Co ri s a us . g B T ST , card

L us Si ni ( oc g ) ,

i i ut m h adj or.

G . akelin Printer and kseller 170 rt treet ri t n. W g , Boo , , No h S ,B g h o

It is un erstoo t at t s etter like all m ot er orks d d h hi l , y h w , sim l re resents the o in on of the aut or and oes not p y p p i h , d n the rat ire 111 an wa bi d O o y y.

A. A GR TRY,

Priest of the O ratoire ,

Me mb e r o f the Acade my.

’ TRANSLATOR S NOTE .

As se era of the translat ns hi c the at n te t v l io , of w h L i x is en are not str ctl l teral I t nk it r t to state t at giv , i y i , hi ig h h the translations are made from the French of Father G r an n rat d ot e clus el r mthe atin. y, x iv y f o L

J . . T . B E ‘ P R E F A C .

“ So long as I only heard raised ag ainst me the

s e s u sts not hrill and ﬁ rce crie of a few Jo rnali , I did

tt t t o t b ut s t pay any a en ion hem , in ilence and pa ience

the t t s s su ts u allowed orren of fal ehood , in l , and cal m But t t t t s t o ss . nie pa by now ha learning , now ha law

ful ut o t t t to as s. a h ri y in ervene , I de ermine do follow I am obedient in everything t o the authority of the

u to ut t . s Ch rch , according my d y and my fai h Thi

As t o w as t o sa . there no need for me y learning , I h ave already declared that I will gratefully accept

t u t s it . every r e cri ici m, come whence may I will h st to it ust t o r t s f. t e ha en do j ice , and cor ec my el All

s e or u t us - u or not replie , learn d co r eo , well fo nded ,

at to which have already reached me , I have g hered t f t o use o t . W t st t g e her, make proﬁ ably i h ill grea er

s t t the ts s rea on will I accep , wi hin limi of my con ci

1 is Pre ace has alrea a eare in art in the Gazet te de France Marc Th f dy pp d, p , of h

12 1 870 . The letter itsel ul a e ll e m re uic l had I not l st ﬁve , f wo d h v fo ow d o q k y, o ’ n weeks work from ill ess . Thi s also has prevented my replying to numerous letters ten e cellent ic for s me time ast a e een a resse to me t , of x , wh h o p h v b dd d ; o

w r I e to i e s ac ti n b the res nt r l ic e e atis e e . wh h, ho v , hop g v f o y p p y 4

the t s t s ence , correc ion which migh come from a Bi hop , even althoug h this Bishop should have no direct au thorit y over me . But if even a Bishop should draw from my words

ff t t t s u s to di eren and illeg i ima e con eq ence , in order

t s u t st t blame me for hem, I ho ld pro e wi h energy and

s t re pect . I should simply reassert that which I mean to sa not suf t a y and if my meaning were ﬁcien ly cle r, s u t i I ho ld correc t .

Fo r th st o f example . I said that e lowe men can and do receive orders from God ; and that I have

s t s s my elf received hem in my rea on , in my con cience ,

t s i But t u and in my fai h . Thi s true . if hey endeavo r “ to u t s t t t t o s the ded ce from hi , ha I arrog a e my elf in

u ss to t ff t t t Ch rch a mi ion each , di eren from ha which ‘ ” ﬁ o w s ut t t st a a st from hierarchical a hori y , I pro e g in it sa t t su s u is w a , and I y, ha ch a con eq ence in no y

t t t s su con ained in my meaning , and ha in any ca e ch t u a ho g ht has never entered my mind . th f h Another example . I compared e policy o t e Church to the earthen vessel which bears the treasure

h v M t r. D h t of the faith . I b e e e wi h g e c amps tha “ the t o f the C u o r o f the u infallibili y h rch , Pope , wo ld

‘ t infalhb iht t infalli be nei her y in g overnmen , nor ‘ b ilit tt s no t t o the t y in ma er which do belong fai h , ‘ nor infallibility in acts which are not deﬁnitions ‘ ” 1 t to t u tt ut of fai h . I beg an hink I co ld a rib e t o ults t o t s the the fa , imperfec ion in policy of

u s tu s s s s Ch rch , many mi for ne , divi ion , hindrance in

1 r D ham s t M u nl u . 13 . r de M . ec o r D a o ett e . L g p g p p, p

the fundamental theses which I have proved in my tt Le ers . I maintain them with so much the more de

t t n s for the st u t s the st ermina io , ince , la fo r mon h , mo violent efforts o f a number o f writers t o destroy them

ssu t u t ss have only i ed , hro gh heir irreparable weakne ,

ro vm t st t s in p g heir impreg nable reng h . Thi will be s t s u t t een in hi Fo r h Le ter .

fte s at t th t A r which , I hall reach leng h , I hope , a last work which I long so much to publish t o the glory o f the Catholic Church and of the centre o f u t u t so ni y , Holy Ch rch and Sacred Cen re , which many

te e s a u it s s t t s t ut in rnal nemie , le g ed , eem , wi h ho e wi ho , are endeavouring now t o dishonour .

L st s the st u s ut a ly , ince mo cowardly cal mnie are tere d w t s t t o t t t t i h re pec my Ca holic belief, I repea ha ,

the a the ss o f an in by g r ce of God , I have happine “ t D m n au n bis dem creasing fai h : o i o ad g e o ﬁ . I do not admit that there is at this present time a single

hvin w ho is e t the man g more convinc d han I am , of g rand and divine truth of Christianity and Catholi

m b ut one t u the t h c is . I have ambi ion pon ear h , whic is t t G o d to s u t the , ha will deign pre erve for me , n il

u of t t s ss ho r my dea h , hi incomparable happine , which h as been that of my whole life .

is t t t s s uss Th being laid down, I add ha , in hi di c ion, during this long time that my adversaries have be en t n t ut t t t so alking alo e and wi ho con radic ion , hey have utt t s s t t o wn s erly bewildered hem elve wi h heir word , w t the u s t the ss inte n i h n mber of voice , wi h ma and 7

sit the s t t t a t e e y of crie , ha hey im gine h y have repli d

s t t o tt s su ss t . omewha my Le er , and even ppre ed hem

the st t For la mon h , I have been doing all in my

w to r t t s to t po er lea n heir objec ion , in order correc all

s s u h u the error which ho ld ave been pointed o t to me .

s t tt is t st t t My pre en Le er , par ly , an inve ig a ion in o and a discussion upon the errors which they attribute to

It is stu u t . t me , above all , a new dy exec ed immedia ely u s u t us t the s pon, and im l aneo ly wi h , proceeding of

h s s t t e m . chool of error, who e orali y I make known FO U R T H L ETTE R .

t s r s t ut s s My hree principal adver a ie , wi ho de pi ing

‘ the t s M r D m n e r . e cha s Dom Guéra o her , are g p , g , and

M . de Marg erie .

st L tt M r s as as t s t o . My ﬁr e er , well hi , reply g

De ham c ps . I am well aware that the Bishop of

O s the st all u has rlean , by ma erly work which E rope

t m t s t to s t read wi h ad ira ion , leave no hing be aid wi h

s t t o the tt s M r the s re pec Le er of g . Archbi hop of

s Maline .

s sa s s t I hall , however, y a few word more re pec ing

t to a unt t s hem , and I begin by calling cco hi Third

L tt in M r a s s ts at ul t e er, which g . Dech mp in er f l leng h

s o f Guéran e r ss s it to a mall work Dom g , and addre e “ me in these words : The idea has struck me o f ‘ ss o u s t fl t u addre ing y my elf, or ra her of in ic ing pon ‘ yo u that which Do m G uérang er has j ust written to u yo .

t s t M r De c ham s t o Behold me , hen , en back by g . p

om u ran r t t w o tt D G é e . O f e w s g all h ri er h a ack me ,

t s not t s s is st one doe know wha he ay , and mi aken m a ridiculous manner

t ut is two In r h , here my reply . I have before me

s t t o 15 68 the one 15 42 Roman Breviarie an erior of ,

the t f 1 t t and o her o 5 36 . Bo h are provided wi h a

u l P ris t u S b Annu o iscato . brief of Pa l III. , Here , hen , are Breviaries g uarantee d by briefs before the year l 15 8 th u 6 e o f t s V . , before Breviary Sain Pi What becomes o f the lesson which they wished to give me But l t u t e s look at the matter a lit le closer . The brief o f 1 53 6 does not permit the ﬁrst comer to t t t s as s s it ts rea hi Breviary he like , ince gran a

o f s t . s privileg e ale and prin ing The econd brief,

su s u t t is given for a b eq en edi ion, more developed , and

s t t t s t o t forbid any prin er excep ho e privileg ed , prin thi s Breviary under pain of ﬁ ne and even of e xcom i n munic at o .

t is t t t . Here , hen , a Breviary very energ e ically pro ec ed

ur ut ll t O a hor knows a his very well .

But is it no t b su ts to f , moreover, a rd in i elf a ﬁrm

t t u to 15 68 t ss t e w as ha , p , nei her more nor le , h re no

ut t t t the f a hen ic Roman Breviary , and ha divine o ﬁce w as g iven over at Rome t o the mercy and to the

su o f the sts ? t se e the g ood plea re copyi In fac , we

u 111 uts t contrary by this Breviary which Pa l . p for h

B r v arium Romanum a P aulo tertio romul atum e i p g . But it is sufﬁcient to open a theolog ical dictionary t o

1 - ir l i iu omanuma Paulo II I . Vo a a B bliotheque S alute Genevieve . B reviar mR m u t B r ariwn omcm ni cor re ormatmn. reoens p ro lg a um. evi R um a f 1 1

se e it - t t w as t - - t t in , ha which cer ain before hand, ha at t at w as the f no ime , Rome , divine o ﬁce given over t o r t t st the t t t ana chy ; ha , for in ance , from hir een h “ century ( 1241) the abbreviation undertaken by the

o fthe s n te s t general Franci ca Minori , Haymon , ob ained ‘ th w e . as t approval of Pope Greg ory IX , and in ro

duc e d h th u o f by Pope Nic olas III . in all e Ch rches

Rome . This is a very serious accusation brought here by

Guéran er st the u A s Dom g again Roman Ch rch . for

s us the unknown scribe has my elf, when I acc e who t ut a e the f . s t s the m il d o ﬁce of S Leo and everal o her ,

us t is di t t st the s acc a ion rec ed nei her again all Pope ,

st st st s it nor ag ain any Pope ; by a ill ronger rea on ,

n h u us t could ot reach t e Roman Ch rch . The acc a ion

Guéran er the t su s s the of Dom g , on con rary , ppo e in

u u t 1 5 68 the st s whole Roman Ch rch , n il , mo di ordered anarchy and the most guilty carelessness in matters

su s to liturgical . They imag ine ch a di order have e xisted from the earliest centuries until afte r the Council of Trent l I think 1 have much more respect

su for the Roman Church than ch a defender .

III .

Second error of which my critic afﬁrms me t o be g uilty . Father Gratry speaks of a Breviary of the ‘ t tu ust t st seven h cen ry . He m be more han a rang er

l os hler Dictionnaire En clo édi ue de la Théolo ie Catholi n . Art le G c . oy p q g q e ic

B réviaire . 12

‘ to all acquaintance with ecclesiastical antiquity to

t l u tu a k abo t a Breviary of the seventh cen ry . Every ‘ body knows that that which we call the Breviary is ” ‘ n t l o ante rior t o the eleventh century . Very well But le t us have recourse ag ain t o the same elementary 2 s u the Di t onar o Th l At the t c i eo o . o rce , y f gy ar icle ’ “ t s is t st ta t Breviary, hi wha I read The mo impor n ‘ for us is the the u Roman Breviary , drawing p of ‘ is due to L e o the t t tu to which Grea (ﬁf h cen ry) , ‘ G s us ft tu t o G the t ela i (ﬁ h cen ry) , S reg ory Grea

s t ( ix h and seventh centuries ) .

No w s the t s t o is due the , ince hree Pope whom

u o f the o f the ft drawing p Roman Breviary are ﬁ h , s t s t tu s the t it s s ix h , and even h cen rie , I have righ , eem , to admit the existence o f this Breviary in the seventh

u But le t us th I ns titutions Litur i ues cent ry . open e g q

f D m u r n r is due o o G é a e s . g him elf To whom , accord “ in t o the t the tu g him , commencemen of li rgical work the first careful preparation of the Divine ‘ O ffic e no t t o t s s the t s t , if he e Pope of fif h , ix h , and “ s t tu s the s the G elasii the even h cen rie , Leo , , Gre 3 g orie s

s s at the o f t s t to the Be ide , end a chap er con ecra ed history of the Liturg y during the ﬁfth and sixth c e n turie s t s us : esu t the ts , I read hi concl ion The r l of fac

‘ u the r s t t is t t the anno nced in p e en chap er , ha ‘ de nitive drawin u o f the ff t tu s ﬁ g p di eren Li rgie , prin

1 Dom Guéran er ﬁrst reatise . 24 . I not su se t at DomGuéran er g , T , p do ppo h g r i m nin is e to la u n the B rev ar ea abbreviation . w h d p y po wo d y, g

2 s h r D ictionnaire Go c le . 3 I i es t . l . 3 nstituti ns Litur u 77 . o g q , , p

t s 1 686 it w as the here , and ince approved by Pope

But t s s s the u st the O f ce hi , in any ca e, decide q e ion ; ﬁ

s is u as s l st of which we are peaking fo nd , I aid (

th P ro er o the R man ler O cza L tt . e o C e er, p in p f g y, ﬁ

r l r m It t h t t o C e o Ro ano . is t e p , hen , par wice Roman,

the t Romano - Roman o f the t o par Breviary , which ,

su t his t s s Do m Guéran er s is not ppor he i , g declare in

u the any way fo nd in Roman Breviary, and in no w ay forms a part o f this Breviary ! And twice over he beg s urg ently the public t o verify the fact with

u t u u t to st t o wn s . s heir eye The p blic h bro gh a op , understands perfectly well that it would be superﬂuous to verify a thing so evident and so easy t o verify ; and my friends themselves understand with reg ret that I

st u so r tt made a mi ake pon g ave a ma er .

But the O f is the i r no , ﬁce really in Roman Brev a y, in the most Roman part of the Breviary : in the O fﬁces

h It i r t is for t e Roman Clergy . s my c i ic alone who

st at st w ho t s not to w t mi aken, or lea pre end know ha

is t t is t . to sa here If he had been willing y wha here,

u s Ye s u u t the oﬁic e he wo ld have aid , ndo b edly, of ‘ i t is u th . It s S . Ag a ho fo nd in e Roman Breviary

u h It w as fo nd in t e Proper of the Roman Clergy . 1 8 u ’ it t 6 6 . B t approved by Pope Innocen XI , in ‘ is no t li t for t t s of ob g a ion every one . Af er hi , Dom

G uéran er s was t t o so w as g , ince he de ermined do , “ fully at liberty to conclude thus Therefore the O fﬁce ‘ ” t is no t the a . But o f S . Ag a ho in Roman Brevi ry t u t o t hen , every reader wo ld have been able apprecia e

the value o f such an arg ument . 15

V .

Another example continuation of the former . “ t t t The leg end of S . Ag a ho , which Fa her Gra ry ” has t t s t s s en i led a forg ery, doe no hing , ay ag ain Dom “ " 1

Guéran e r b ut ss the u st st t ut . g , expre p re hi orical r h

s : t t u The leg end say Tha he VI . Co ncil condemned the same errors and the same persons whom Ag atho ‘ ” t s had condemned . Now Ag a ho condemn Theodore of us us r us u t Pharan, Cyr , Serg i , Pyr h , Pa l and Pe er of

st t t all t f s the Con an inople , wi h heir ollower ; and

u s of us Co ncil condemn Theodore Pharan, Sergi ,

us ul t us Pyrrh , Pa and Pe er, and , moreover, Honori ,

us Mac arius t his s t and Cyr , and , wi h di ciple S ephen .

t s tw o sts t ? u u t d Are he e li iden ical No , ndo b e ly, since there are three more names in the list of the

u M r u u s ac a i s t . Co ncil, namely, Honori , , S ephen We f ust t t t t the o . t ts m , hen , admi ha leg end S Ag a ho omi the of us the t t o f the u name Honori , which ex Co ncil

H s w t as th s . u as e s t give Now , onori hen, in pre en

da the r t u st . y, g ea q e ion

not s the And only doe leg end of S . Ag atho omit the o f us b ut it s t s name Honori , add he e words Ag atho has declared in express terms that until now ‘ the s all Pope who have preceded him, have been ‘ free from every kind o f error Antecessores suos ab omni erroris labe immunes hucusque fuiss e exp res ‘ ” sis r d l ra t ve bis ec a vi . These words of the false

ff t moro e ve r the leg end , very di eren from text of

t aim at st s t t t Ag a ho , e abli hing ha Ag a ho had no

D m Guéran er rs Lett o t er . 29 g , ﬁ , p . 16

t u t o f us s ho gh in any way condemning Honori , ince he

ust s in ex ress terms t t t j iﬁe him p , hence ha he Council

no t us s it t did condemn Honori , ince limi s itself to

the s s s t s condemning ame per on whom Ag a ho condemn .

the u s u Now Co ncil condemn Honori s .

All t s is t t hi leg end , hen, a decep ion and a manifest

Dom Guéran er s t s ts s g know he e fac , and doe not t deny hem . “ “ But the s s is ss u t leg end, ay he , no le a p re his orical ” t ut r h . How can this be ? Fo r the delicate reason as follows : Was it necess ary t o speak o f Honorius ‘ s t not t to t who e name Ag a ho did men ion, and rela e events which only took place after the death of this Pope W hat are these events which only took place after the death o f Ag atho ? The condemnation o f Honorius

the t s t o n 2 1 8 68 . and o her ook place March , The

f the u w as t 8 1 h o 6 6 . t e end Co ncil Sep ember , And t i n t of t u 10 682 . s a dea h Ag a ho Jan ary , Here , hen , arg ument founded entirely upon a mistake in chro nolog y.

L e t us t t s s u look , moreover, in o hi ing lar mode of t t th t arg ument i self. Whe her e condemna ion of Hono

us t o r st t o the t t ri were an erior po erior dea h of Ag a ho ,

u it t t it s u no t s how co ld follow ha ho ld be poken of, whilst all the others are spoken o f All are at

the s t the s st t the s t t . ame momen , ame in an , in ame ex “ ” This profound and deci si ve word ( w as it necessary )

l m n 2 Guéra er ﬁrs reatise 9 . o t . D g , T , p

‘ ’ ! s t the u le t Well ince hey employ word cal mny, us sa y a few words upon it .

sa st t t the o f uéran r i I y, ﬁr , ha work Dom G g e s nothing from beg inning to end b ut a travesty of t t wha I wro e . “ sa t t the t t o f the Defence o the I y ha i le work, f ‘ Roman Church ag ains t the Accusati ons of F ather

Gratr is u us t t u i y, a cal mnio i le . The cal mny s “ further agg ravated by this expression : He will

r t so u s a ains t the wh le hur h reg e many cal mnie g o C c . Do m Guérang er is well aware that I have attacked

t the m u the u nei her Ro an Ch rch , nor whole Ch rch ;

l t t tt the s the Bre viar o ne and ha , in a acking leg end of y,

tt s t the u nor the a ack nei her Roman Ch rch , whole

Church .

u t at ts to it s s He o g h , all even , know , ince he him el f,

his I ns titutions Litur i ues t o u the in g q , having j dg e

the s r reform of Breviary , in pi ed and approved by Leo t t t . u w as no o X . , Clemen VII , and Pa l III afraid “ fﬁ t t it w as s st us to the a rm , ha a di a ro reform , which ” h tu w as s r ust whole past of t e Li rgy ac iﬁced . M we sa t t t us ss s i su t the y ha , h expre ing him elf, he n l ed

u u t the s u ? Roman Ch rch , and cal mnia ed Univer al Ch rch “ s is f s s : Thi how he de end him elf If, now , we allow ourselves to j udg e so severely a work which belong s ‘ t o s Po ntiﬁ s s it w as s everal Roman , ince accompli hed

‘ u t s t it is not su t t nder heir in pira ion , rely ha we are

‘ res olved to accep t always as the bes t all that comes ‘ ”1 from the S upre me S ee ! W hat is the meaning ofthese

1 1 . . 3 I i itur . t . nst tut . L g p 77 1 9 phrases ? O ne does no t accept as the bes t that which

dis as tr us is considered o . But o ne has no t for that blasphemed the Roman

u the u Ch rch , nor whole Ch rch . ‘ ’ I have called cowardly calumnies the lying

us t t acc a ions maintained ag ainst me on this poin . My

v t t o the u t o the de o ion Roman Ch rch , and whole

u is t u t t t o f t s s t ss s Ch rch , r er han ha he e fal e wi ne e who

us acc e me .

us s t s t t Beca e I have aid , wha everybody know , ha t the s s as here are in Roman Breviary fal e leg end , t t . s s s us t o u Benedic XIV him elf al o aid , beca e I poin s the the r us ome in Proper of Roman Cle gy , and beca e I am indignant with an energ etic indignation ag ainst the ut t n assa s t m ila io of p g e , behold hem denying

t t t t s our o w n e s se e wi h de ermina ion fac which ey , and “ denouncing me as g uilty o f calumny ag ainst the whole Church

s the s the I had aid , however Are leg end

And is the t the u Breviary Breviary , hen , Ch rch

s n t the the I had aid , ag ai Nei her Papacy , nor ” l u t s s Ch rch , nor God , ha h de ired a fal ehood .

Yes it is t t s t t the us s s , af er hi , ha acc er allow him elf t o entitle his false witne ss Defence of the Roman ” Church a ains t the Accusations o F ather ratr g f G y. And he accuses me o f having hurled calumnies ” ag ainst the whole Church ! Dom Guérang e r must

r t to s t s u t s su pe mi me be omewha harp pon hi bject .

st us ut c aluminate d his A Prie , odio ly o rag ed and in

1 i s Let er r t t . 7 . F , p 7 20

f t has the t the ut t o s the ai h, rig h , and even d y , di g race

us the s acc er and fal e witnesses . I submit t o my Fathers to my brethren in the

st su t to of s i i t and of Prie hood , I bmi every man p r t t u s u s s . honor, he e iniq i o proceeding t t t s u t ts st s t . I add , ha hi a daci y meri a cha i emen

st s t i th u t t o f the t The cha i emen s e p blic s atemen fac .

s no w t u the u t Thi I inﬂic pon g il y .

VI .

t —I . s t ssu t t t the Fif h error aid , wi h Bo e , ha , in

t u t ut the s t t ancien Roman Breviary , n il abo even een h

t u w as n h th nd m o t e st o f . e c o e cen ry , read , fea S Leo ,

t o f us t t the t of na ion Honori ; and ha , from ime

t ﬁ n t u t . d t t t s s s Clemen VIII , we ha , in hi ame In r c ion, the name of Honorius has been taken o ut o f the midst o f the names o f those condemned by the t u u t 1 5 0 s . 2 Six h Co ncil for here y I q o e a Breviary of , which contains the condemnation of Honorius . I

t u t t s s t s ut t the migh q o e many o her , ince hi m ila ion of tu Breviary took place about t he end of the sixth cen ry .

G uéran e r s s to —I no t Dom g wi he prove , do know

it is tt s u t o —t t t s why , and of li le con eq ence me , ha hi “ ut t is u s s tu m ila ion m ch earlier, and he ay In my rn ‘ a to u t s I am prep red q o e Roman Breviarie , even ‘ t 1 5 20 the . earlier han , in which legend of S Leo ‘ s not ff no t s the doe o er a word , a ingle word , of

‘ ur passag e quoted from the edition o f 1 5 20. O ‘ at s s t s tw o o f t w library Sole me con ain hem, hich I ‘ place at the disposal o f Father Gratry. (p .

t s t the st o f the cien Breviarie , which con ain hi ory

t u the s the ff t Six h Co ncil, and g ive name of di eren

t s the o f here ic condemned , g ive all alike name Hono

us u the t s s . t ri , Pyrrh , and o her I have main ained ,

t t t the t s and do main ain , ha ancien Breviarie , which

u t s t s u t e n reprod ce he e condemna ion , reprod ce hem

tire l t o the Liber P onti calis t out y according ﬁ , wi h

tt the us st the omi ing name of Honori , whil new Brevi

s s the L iber P onti calis s arie , which al o copy ﬁ , alway 1 ut u f th t h th t c o t o e lis t e name o f e here ical Pope .

No w the t w ho t s t abbrevia or , ﬁnding hi ancien In “ st u t I n ua S nodo condemnati s unt S er ius r c ion , g y g , ” C rus Honori us t e who has the u t to y , , y , and a daci y “ t o t the In eo concilio C rus wri e in new Breviary, y , ‘ ” S er ius e t P rrhus condemnati sunt t us t out g , y , h aking

the us has ut t the name of Honori , clearly m ila ed “ A s ssu t s has s it text . Bo e aid He era ed in the ‘ Roman Breviary I n B reviario R omano haec

‘ r nt t h t t t th erase u . e e Now , primi ive ex of Roman

is st to met t 1 5 20 Breviary , which ill be wi h in , and

s t is at the s t t he t t o f the L iber perhap la er, ame ime ex

l The following was written to me upon this subject by one of the ! e epe rs of the Arc i e s was en u t o ma e s me t ese researc es for me h v , who g ood o g h k o of h h

“ I eclare t at the reater art the ancient re iaries a ut t ent - ﬁve d h g p of B v , bo w y

out t i rt ic are to b e un in the Im erial Li rar re r uce the con of h y, wh h fo d p b y , p od

‘ demnations the i t uncil I e clare m re er t at in all those in ic of S x h Co ; d , o ov , h wh h

are un the names the eretics c n emne t ere is not a sin le one to m fo d of h o d d, h g , y

‘ kn le e ic es not i e the name n rius it t se all the ow dg , wh h do g v of Ho o w h ho of

t rs o he .

1 4 M . i Nos 3 0 1 2 2 8 S ee . S S . L at n . 88 1 9 and 1 290 the 14th centur , , , , , of y ;

Nos 5 6 06 1 049 60 1 262 &c h 5 th n r . 7 14 7 . t e 1 ce tu . , , , , , , of y 23

P onti calis at the s t s the t o f the ﬁ , and ame ime al o ext

ibe Diur us L r n .

sa t t t t s is s t ut I y, hen , ha hi a fal iﬁca ion and a m ila t It is t u ion . o fra ds of this kind that the text from J o b is applicable : Numquid indig et D eus mendacio ‘ vos tro it is t o frauds of this kind that the passag e

r is s s f om Melchior Cano applicable , who , him elf al o , has s th s t t o s t o recogni ed i endency fal ify and lie , in order t o exalt the Roman Pontiffs a tendency which

us s in t s t e s r s to the he cr he he e rm , p eci ely applicable “ affair of Honorius : Peter has no need of o ur false ‘ “ hoods Non indig et P etrus mendacio nos tro adula ” t ne n s tra non et io o eg .

t us u st s the tt If Melchior Cano h nder and ma er, how has Bossuet treated this g reat mutilation o f the Roman “ ” ? t us s Breviary The condemna ion of Honori , aid “ is u the ts the he , which fo nd everywhere in ac of ‘ s t s t t ( u u s ix h , even h , and eigh h Ec menical Co ncil is found likewise in the L iber Diurnus of

the t ffs t t is to sa t ss s Roman Pon i ha y, in heir profe ion ‘ t It is u t o o the t of fai h . fo nd , , in Ancien Roman

‘ s the stru t s . u to o ur Breviarie , in In c ion of S Leo , p

‘ ‘ time ° Idem etiam in vetus tis Romanis B revi arns ‘ u um in s anc ti L eonis I vit usque ad nos trum scec l I . a ” “ s s ssu t the L iber Now , ay Bo e ag ain,

‘ Diurnus they hide as much as they can . In the ‘ Roman Breviary they have erased the name o f ‘ B r ar R ma o h e eraserunt us in evi io o n az . But Honori , what I have they also concealed the facts themselves

1 si D larat . l a . i P sim D en o eo . vu . c . as . ef , p xxv , 24

The truth shines forth o n all sides ; and the facts ‘ make themselves known so much the more clearly in t u h propor ion t o their eag erness to m tilate t e text s . “ t s ? us t o st s t And why all hi Beca e , e abli h heir

s st t o f t s t s t ut y em, hey have need he e con rivance , wi ho which all their thesis is lost All these thing s are b ut incoherent fables playing ‘ u u i s no t s s . s s st pon word , and rea on A ca e lo when ” 1 it s t ti n need o be defended by such ﬁ c o s .

ssu t e t t Bo e , like M lchior Cano , knew hen perfec ly this school o f falsehood and error that we se e here in t ac ion .

VII . “ t —M s us s ro Six h error . y adver ary acc e me of g ‘ tes ue s s to the g anachroni m , even making Librarian

st s us t o f t s Ana a i a con emporary Pope Ag a ho , howing the most extraordinary ig norance upon the subject o f ‘ t s s A st s us tt ut to the i s o f hi ame na a i , a rib ing him l ve the Popes o f the seventh century in the L iber P onti ‘ calis s t t is the ﬁ , when every body know ha he only ‘ ” t t . t is ut o f the s . Ye s a hor hree la (p , here in t s is t s t ss ni s hi pag e , which a ran la ion, a g ro anachro m

t w o tu s st . But of cen rie , made by a mi ake in copying

s is no t the s the ut of if I were my elf, which ca e , a hor

thi s n s has nothin to do with the a achroni m , which g

ues tion t u m it s u t q , wha wo ld follow fro I ho ld limi

t t he st It i s to . s t my elf correc ing mi ake , in fac , a

corre ction o f the proof- sheets; This has been done

1 De ens io Declarat . 1. vu . ca . i . Passim f , p xxv .

2 6

1 5 68 n o t 1602 . t s t t , and in In wha way doe ha inj ure my argument ? I did no t wish t o blame the V us . s us 15 68 t Breviary of Pi , preci ely beca e , in , hey mig ht have been still ig norant o f the i mposture of the f t m th alse decre als . I only wished t o bla e e

t n t I t s t s edi io of Clemen VII , which main ain hi

t u t Baro niu§ e deplorable in rod c ion , when had g iv n the t s the f o f the alarm , and o her had proved org ery

t s f the s u - o s . t t decre al P e do I idore I am hen rig h , and 1 t is . 5 68 t t u my cri ic wrong If, in , hey had in rod ced t s s t the ust hi fal e decre al , when forg ery had only j

v t t st o f t s u t been pro ed , hey mig h ill be ignorant hi q i e t . u recen proof They co ld no long er be so in 1 602 . It is here that they w ere wrong ; and the wrong is

t the t t t t s agg rava ed by fac , ha hey have pre erved even to o ur t t s ss o f ime hi pa ag e a forg er .

IX .

t —s h t Eigh h error . I how t e gradual developmen of a fable introduced in the sixteenth century into the

m n th t inu a R o a e o f he u o f S e ss . Breviary , fable Co ncil

1 the f is not t 1 5 3 6 1 5 42 5 20 . In , able here In and in ,

the ut t u . in Breviary p for h by Pa l III , which , however,

s at s ss ut s o ut the l aim only conci ene , and which c who e

the t u se e the history of Six h Co ncil , I fable in

But it is no t t u the question appear . here in f ll ; t th it most audacious part is omitted . La er (whe er be

8 o r 1 602 is o f tt s u t in 1 5 6 in , li le con eq ence) , hey

But it is the t of introduced it comple tely . correc ion

that i I f r us the t ut w as 1 602 bring orwa d , beca e r h 27

“ It is st s t t su h then known . a oni hing ha c a fable ‘ ” s u st t the ho ld be ill re ained in Roman Breviary , said in the e ig thte enth century the Benedictines of “ ” 1 r V D t s W t au the A t o erif in a e . e Sain M r, in f y g are

th s t h t t u compelled t o say e ame in e nine een h cent ry . “ It is astonishing that such a fable should be still

’ ” ‘ i h B a s ri t e . pre erved Roman revi ry Dom Cellier, a t u s avant at u t s o n t s su t in r e , r e Benedic ine , aid hi bjec his G eneral His tor o S acred Authors y f , a work 2 “ approved by tw o briefs o f Benedict XIV The objection that the history of the fall o f Marcellinus and of the Council o f Sinue ssa is authorised by the

is u t s t Roman Breviary, nwor hy of a reply , ince here

i s - a - s tt s no one now day , however li le ver ed in

‘ t s s no t t the cri ici m , who doe admi forg ery of a ‘ quantity o f document s from which the Instructions ‘ o f the c s t s fo r Roman Breviary are ompo ed ; ho e ,

to the t sm st t example , which belong bap i of Con an ine , S and the donations which he made to the Roman

“ t the sts t s s o ne S ill more , Bollandi hem elve hope day t o se e all these fables c ut o ut of the Roman

‘ so t t at t v u Breviary , ha , leng h , e ery body may nder ‘ ‘ stand that they are only fables : cum s cilicet inter ’ m r ru m als tat B r o nes convene it de co f i e . a o nius weakly

s t to s to t defend hem in order reply , in ome way , he

t ts the st as violen complain of mo learned men, who k

1 A rt dc Ver er le s Dates e it . (10 1 783 t . 1 . 2 24 . iﬁ , d , , p

' ’ 2 H e e at s ut rs h res l Ecc es as t is t . G n r e de A eu S o l i i ues iii c . . 685 . g , p 3 I add t at the st atement Dom elli e r still has its me anin at the , h of C g present da l an im . It u b e rtant r to un e rta t is y wo d po wo k d ke h . 28

‘ how they can po ssibly allow such forg e ries t o remain ‘ the m t u in Ro an Breviary , and read hem p blicly in

‘ ” 1 the Church .

W t it ut t s s t ha ever may be abo he e fable , which hey no

to t the s t t tu long er dared main ain in even een h cen ry , we

t m the t t the a I ﬁnd he in nine een h in Roman Brevi ry . s it a crime t o complain as the wisest men in the time of

Baro nius t o the sts it is did , according Bollandi No ,

it is ut It is ut t o no t a crime a d y . a d y repeat unceasingly that God has no need of o ur falsehoods ; t t t the u c the t ha nei her Ch r h , nor Papacy , nor Sain

t as s s o f o ur Pe er, Melchior Cano how , have any need

s stratag ems fo r their ervice .

X .

W e have j ust g iven eig ht examples o f this curious audacity o f assertion and neg ation corrected each But instant by humiliating errors . we are far from

th t st t is e s . s . s having aid all Thi , I hink , mo rang e It is t he ense mble of the discussion upon the question

u t s s o f u o f Honori s . If ever hi chool error prod ced a ’

f d ce uvre o f u t it is . che a daci y , here

t ! t s t the s us Up ill hi ime , defender of Honori ,

the ss o f t us t knowing well weakne heir ca e , kep

n the s t nu t themselves o defen ive , and pleaded ex e a ing

s circumstance . t ut t s t t No one can deny , wi ho elling a fal ehood , ha three ( Ecumenical Councils co ndemned Honorius as heretical .

‘ ’ 1 m ad A ota S anc torum Man. P 1 0pyla tt ,

u the t s t s is the f s f S ch are fac , and hi why de ender o

u - the ss o f t us Honori s knowing well badne heir ca e ,

t s s s u st s keep hem elve alway pon a mode defen ive .

But u t t o f t , behold q i e ano her kind advoca e

s t s s t t s th o , e f pre en him elf and al og e her chang e mode “ t . no f tt s s . ﬁg h ing He long er de end , he a ack And he attacks with insult all those who dare t o speak of the

t o f u d no t u t th condemna ion Honori s . He oes j s ify e

ut t o f the t m ila ion Roman Breviary, wi h which every t t t h ssu t s t s s . one , og e her wi h Bo e , reproache i chool

It is no t u st ut t s s t o us it a q e ion of m ila ion , he ay ; is u st intrus ion ? Ye s o u t a q e ion of , y have in ro duc e d the name of Honorius into a passag e which “ u t not to t it ! Ye s the t us o f his o g h con ain , In r ion

t the ss is s u name in o pa a e imply a cal mny , and an , g

su t T h t th s ab rdi y . e let er of Honorius is in e hand ‘ o f everybody and it is not possible to travesty it t o ‘ t s t t t ut i st s t . hi ex en , wi ho fal ifying Every hone man ‘ would have effaced the name of Honorius from a list ‘ ” 1 u u t n t t ﬁ ur pon which he o g h o o g e .

us s n ss t s is Th peaks Do m G uéra g e r. A uredly hi th t t utt u f u e boldes hing ever ered in favo r o Honori s .

t us t i L s . i t t tt t e op Th s s well wor h a lit le a en ion .

t t t is mutilation t s tt o f In fac , ei her here a in hi ma er i t i intrus i n t s . us o r t s o . Honori , here an Tha eviden

T o t s w ho u st the u st all ho e nder and q e ion , and who

no t s s o r o f the s are member , deceiver deceived , chool

is t s o f the ut t . error, m ila ion clear To explain hi

1 m n er e eral our critics are satis e it sa in t at Do Guéra g (p . S v of ﬁ d w h y g h “ ” the erasing the name of Honorius was desired fromﬁlial piety. ‘ 3 1

ut t it is suf t t o m t t t ta o f m ila ion , ﬁcien ad i ha a Secre ry

the mss the r un us V . Com i ion of B eviary , der Pi , did , I

no t sa t r u b ad t sa t u the s do y h o gh fai h , I y hro gh fal e s st — the s s st st t s s t y em, and fal e y em exi ed in hi re pec

Baro nius rm —ta the o f in and Bella ine , ke away name

u Honori s .

It is e u t at t s t no gh h hi Secre ary , like Bellarmine , ‘ ’ thinks that the taking away the word animas in the

t t r a t o f o f . b c prayer S Pe er, ook place y a g and Divine Providence Fortass e non s ine mag na Dei ” r i nt p ov de ia. It is enough that this Secretary must have been o f a disposition of the same kind as Dom G uérang e r a man capable of maintaining that Honorius has been calumniated in an absurd way during nearly a thou sand years by the whole Church ; capable o f main taining that the name of Hono rius w as introduced by a det e stable intrus ion into t he list o f those con de mne d ; cap able of declaring that an honest man

ust the u at t to su r ss m have co rage leng h pp e , in all

c s ast u t s the o f H us ec le i ical mon men , name onori , who

n t t an su ought ot o appear here in y ch a way . This hypothesis is sufﬁcient t o explain this mu tilatio n the t s as as the t and o her , well all in erpola t s s c Do m G uéran e r se e s us ion , in e g , we , approve and j tiﬁe s r t t t the ts the ss s eve y hing, now ha fac and pa ag e tt t t are much be er known han hen .

t s h t s s i t . Is t t to c a Now, hi ypo he i I admi , hen, lumniate the u t o t t t ' whole Ch rch , admi ha a man might have been met with in the sixteenth 82

su as Do m G uéran er ss ss the s in ch g , who po e ed ame t e lle c tual t the s s st t r s the charac er, ame y ema ic e ror , same resolution in his treatment o f texts and facts L e t me be allowed a short dig ression fo r my de ' fence

Is the tt t s t s s ask su ti , admi ing hi hypo he i , I ag ain , in l ng the Universal Church ? is it insulting the Roman Church ? is it insulting the Papacy ? is it insulting even Baro nius o r Bellarmine ? They have invented “ su s st s o f u t o f su t ab rd y em defence , nwor hy ch g rea ” t t ts s as ssu t ss s it . Bu a mind , Bo e expre e , all even , they are neither the Papacy nor the Church . They have desired in theology the sovereig nty of the

st n fo r t s s end in view . They have rive hi end by fable ,

su t t s s s But t s t by b le ie , by Sophi m . he e men , in heir

ss s t s t t the u ? pa ion and heir error , are hey hen Ch rch

t the u the t st ss are hey Roman Ch rch , Mo her and Mi re of the Churches ? are they the Papacy ? He who dares to confound the loyal and necessary c o nde mna tion o f these fault s with an attack upon the Roman

u it is utt s u I Ch rch , he who er a cal mny

But le t us tu t o o ur u st re rn principal q e ion .

W t the t s s t t ha ever may be hypo he i which hey admi , the mutilation is a fact and it is towards the end o f the sixteenth cent ury that the name o f Honorius w as

o ut f h t aken o t e Roman Brevi ary .

But it is o n t s as w e s t t the s ut hi , have aid , ha ab ol e “ d o f us st s u s o ut efender Honori and p, and crie There is here no mutilation it is an intrus ion that we must ” it c all .

3 4

t t s u st is ut ab Tha which , in hi q e ion , imm able and solutel su t o ff t the d s s y perior every e or of a ver e chool, is the fact of t he three ( Ecumenical Councils condemn in us t t g Honori in heir dogma ic decrees . W hat is the audacious defender about to dare to u t st t s t t s nder ake ag ain he e hree dog ma ic decree , deli

e ntu t o tu u e s rt v red from ce ry cen ry , a h ndred y ar apa ,

t ( u C u s —t t is to sa the by hree Ec menical o ncil , ha y, by

u t t t s the s whole Ch rch repea ing , hree ime , ame declaration

Here he is. He introduces a novel theology o f the

Councils . t t He eaches his . The canonical text of the Councils is no t found in the canons o f the Councils it is u the tt o f the who fo nd only in Le er Pope ,

h u s tt is th t u t t s t e . e approve Co ncil Thi Le er r e ex , the t t ni t t it is ss ex cano cal , heological , wi h which po ible

u A s t o the t t ts o f the s or to arg e . ex i elf canon

t s t s t t si dog ma ic decree , hi ex weighed, con dered , pro

ai u t the u s t s t t is cl med , and prom lg a ed by Co ncil , hi ex no long er o f importance . No reader assuredly would be able to believe in the st of t s t o r u u st it exi ence hi heology , wo ld nder and ,

st without having considered it in it s source . Li en Here is the dog matic decree o f the Sixth Council

f us . s o r upon the case o Honori Thi decree , canon ,

s as ins truments o S atan of condemn f , Theodore

‘ us us u t o f Pharan , Sergi , Pyrrh , Pa l and Pe er Con ” stantino le s us o f . p , likewi e Honori , Pope old Rome “ And here is the Letter o f the Pope Honorius did 3 5

‘ no t cause the doctrine of this Apostolic Church to ‘ s t b ut t s has t the hine for h , by a profane rea on, lef ‘ t u t to t ut s t s t o fai h , which o g h be wi ho po , expo ed ‘ u destr ction .

Yo u se e t s tw o t ts the t t the u he e ex ; ex of Co ncil,

h . L o and t e text of S e .

No w t s tw o t ts is the t u t t , of he e ex , which r e ex of the Sixth Council t t : . Reply The ex of S . Leo

t f is the t e to the Here , hen, I a ﬁrm , h ory applied “ t u s : us di d no t us t o s par ic lar ca e Honori ca e hine ,

& s t i r t c . s s Thi la phrase eve y hing . The “ s W e t t canon which precede , have ana hema ized,

is t &c . ? , no hing

Ye s s Guéran er s e o f the t t , crie Dom g , p aking ex “ h r h n is the ixth m ni al . e e t e S c e c of S Leo , , , Counc il ; here it is in its veritable purport here it is the true Sixth Council ; that t o which ‘ the Roman Pontiff has g iven its necessary and ‘ canonical form ; that which commands the respect ” 1 o f th t u e fai hf l .

It s r t s t t Pe e ft follow f om hi , ha every p , a er every

u in tt t the u Co ncil , can , a Le er, g ive a repor of Co ncil .

s t t o r t it Thi repor may be exac , inexac ; may be

1 is tru t hat Dom Guéran er intr P . 1 8 . It so e uces a ne w t e l t at M g od h o og y, h .

eri in his ir Le tter 26 n e sa s de Mar e . t : I am nl in m ut in g , Th d , p ( o ) , y o y do g y d y ‘ ascribing to Dom Guérang er all the honour of the de cisive rapp rochement

c ntaine in t is ara ra I e se in m wa b ut the discover or it is o d h p g ph , xpo y y, y, f

one el n s entirel to the last ritin the le arne Ab b é le m s es . , b o g y w g of d of So

h me And . 3 3 e u tes t is sa assa e Dom Guéran er ann uncin it , p , q o h p g of g , o g “ ” “ t us : H ere a mira l re mar s Dom G uéran er is the tru h , d b y k g , e ixt uncil S h Co , 3 6

t us th incomple e , beca e e Pope mig ht not have Wi shed

to t e Ver thin : rela e y g he can , in ﬁne , modify and

the t t f th i o e s . t t it chang e ex canon Wha ever be ,

s the t u t t o f the u the true Council become r e ex Co ncil , ,

the veritable ur ort the necessar and canonical form p p , y

o this s ame Coun l f ci .

But t s so the u s t , if hi be , Co ncil are annihila ed

ssu t s is t t the s t s s A redly , and hi exac ly wha ec de ire ,

the s t o s the u s to su ss de ire aboli h Co ncil , and ppre

the s t Epi copa e .

t is t di s of the Here , cer ainly, a heolog ical covery st u i h ﬁr rank . The Co ncil s no long er at all in t e

t t t s of the u its s its ex i elf Co ncil , in canon and

s s is no t th in ts veritable decree . Thi e Council i p urp ort ; this is not the true Council t o which the Roman Pontiff has g iven its necessary and canonical form; it is no t this whic h commands the resp ect of

th h ul u is the tt of e fait f . No ; the true Co ncil Le er

the hi s t ss al Pope , w ch g ive heir nece ary and canonic form t o the canons or dog matic decrees o f the u Co ncil .

s is the t o f u s u Thi g eneral heory Co ncil pon which ,

i ut to at st the of us s . la , defence Honori abo depend

XII .

s Dom G uéran er s s Thi being laid down , g peak in in these very terms ” “ s w ho is s s t s I am , aid he , a man ea ily a i ﬁed I

grant that the Sixth Council did condemn Honorius. c t o f t the From the histori al poin view , I admi

i o f the the t C u has mean ng decree of Six h o ncil , by that same ac t also chang ed the meaning of the Seventh

t u s o ne tw o and Eig h h Co ncil , which were held and

centuries afterwards . But how could such an effect be pos sible “ Here it is : The profound respect which the Seventh and Eig hth Councils testify fo r the Apostolic ‘ t ts does not allo w u s to s u ose See in all heir ac , pp that they added the name o f Honorius t o the list of ‘ persons anathematized in any other sense than that ‘ I ” l of Le o I.

is t Such is the whole arg ument . There no hing “ more ! After which Dom G uérang er exclaims : I

t e t o t re - st s hink I have r plied every hing , and e abli hed ‘ ” the facts .

Ye s d to G uéran er the tt , accor ing Dom g , le er of

t s tw o u s f L e o II . de ermine , h ndred year be orehand , the meaning o f the dog matic decree o f the Eig hth

(Ecumenical Council . The Council which condemns and anathematizes

heretical its do matic decree t Honorius as in g , canno ,

n its s t the sus t by reaso of re pec for Holy See , be pec ed of having had the audacity t o g ive to the word ’ " ’ t n t t t of ne li ent heretical any o her meani g han ha g g ,

is i t o o ur ut the of . which , accord ng a hor, meaning S

L e o .

u t ut s s t t it s The Co ncil , in r h , peciﬁe ha condemn Honorius as a follower of the impious dog mas of the

t s But the s t the u its here ic . re pec which Co ncil , in all

3 l Dom Guéran er l st reatise . 6 . g , T , p 39

ts t st s for the s ut s not ac , e iﬁe Holy See , ab ol ely doe allow anyone to suppose that it intended to speak of ’ h heres s . s t u s s here y The e ree Co ncil , in aying y, only ‘ ’ t to sa ne li en i i not tt us to ce . t s mean y g g No , permi ed

su s s t t t t t o t ppo e , for a ingle momen , ha hey g ave heir

s t i word any o her mean ng .

XIV .

l Guéran er t s di Unhappi y, for Dom g , all he e incre ble

ff ts t s di ul us s s s ut e or , and he e ri c o di coverie , are ab ol ely us ss s ssa ut t o u t ele . A ingle pa g e , which I am abo q o e , upsets everything . Even if we should admit the theory which suppre s se s the u s the s s Co ncil , even if canon and decree s u u s u ho ld no longer be of any val e , and if we ho ld admit everything which is found in the letters o f S .

the t u Guéran er ul st Leo , all ro ble of Dom g wo d ill

s t h tt e s t s u st . t e be ab ol ely lo By le r alone of hi Pope , the tt o f us is s as the ma er Honori decided , preci ely th u s it ree Co ncil decided .

st t t o t s a of . his tt to Li en , hen , hi p g e S Leo , in le er

the Erwi a. King of Spain, g

su s t t Guéran er who s I am rpri ed ha Dom g , depend

u ss s h s so u the . a not m ch pon pa ag e from S Leo ,

u t t s uts an t o the q o ed hi pag e , which clearly p end

s t o ne an ca e , and af er reading which , no can y long er ask whether Honorius w as formally condemned as heretical and as a Monothelite by the Councils and the

s Pope . O mne s ue haere tic se assertio nis u t s q a c ore , venerando

s t c o ndemnati c atholic ee s ae cen en e concilio , , de eccle i ‘ adunatione ro e cti su t e st us Pharani p j n , id Theodor ‘ t us e isco us us us us u us an p p , Cyr Alexandrin , Sergi , Pa l , ‘ r us et t us u Co nst antino olit ani ee Py rh Pe r , q ondam p pr ‘ sul s e t una c um eis us us ui e , Honori Roman , q imma ‘ c ulatam a o stolic ae t raditio nis u u ee p reg lam , q am a pr ‘ de c essorib us suis ac c epit maculari c o nse nsit se d e t

Mac arium A ntio c he num c um t e us disc i u , S ephano j p ‘ haeretic ze ravitatis ma istro e t Po l c hro nio lo , imo p g , y ‘ uo dam s s ui nu e r q in ano ene , novo Simone , q p , per ‘ hee re ticae rae dic atio nis ollic e b atur im lere u p p p , neq e ‘ rursus ad viam verse c o nfe ssio nis salut e m c o nfusus ‘ t es t c o nde mnatione mulc atus e st e t O M conver i , erna ; ‘ NES H I c um A o llinario st Eut che Ario , p , Ne orio , y ,

T he o do sio T heme sio t t t u u Severo , , in Dei a e a q e h ma ‘ nitate m st J e su st U AM VO LUNT AT EM Do ini No ri Chri i , N UNAMQUE O PERAT IO NEM PRE DIC ANTES do c trinamhee re

' tic am im ude nte r c o nab antur u p defendere neq e enim , ‘ ut t s o ortue rat S anc t arum Scri turarum e t Sacerdo e p , p

t um t e stimo niis de mo nstrab ant se d mundanis Pa r hoc , 80 phismatib us evang elium Christi callide machina ‘ tu rv rt r M c um su s e rro rib us ban r pe e e e . QUOS O NES i ‘ ” 1 u t su ro e cit s divina cens ra de sanc a a p j eccle ia .

the ut s the t t All a hor of here ical doc rine , condemn ‘ the s t the u ed by en ence of venerable Co ncil , have

I R is no c nse uence et er t is etter b e r m P e Le o II . or r m of o q wh h h L f o op , f o

his success r ene ict II . o , B d

At the : the authors o the heres beg inning All f y,

st m us is u t among who Honori en mera ed .

A t the ft the u e t : All middle , and a er en m ra ion ‘ ’ t s omnes hi t and tau t t he he e ( ) who were here ical , g h unity o f will and the unity o f operation in Jesus

Christ .

At the t the t Monothelite end, af er proof of heir ‘ ’ heresy : All o f whom ( g uos omnes ) have been

t ﬁ om the s ut rejec ed bo om of the Church . The a hors or readers who only quote o r only read the beginning

of t s ss s us the st hi pa ag e , eeing Honori placed in la

t t us t place , and charg ed wi h ano her acc a ion , may , very st t s t t t us w as ric ly peaking , main ain ha Honori added to the st t s t u u t o f li of here ic , al ho g h only g il y having ‘ u t t s S omnes t . Bu favo red hem hi econd (all) , which

s t the u t s s us t t t s come af er en mera ion , how ha all ho e

ust the ut s o f the who have j been named , are a hor heretical assertion : haereticce assertionis auctores “ and shamelessly endeavoured t o defend the heresy ‘ which admit s only the unity of will and o f opera ‘ t in t t t tion in Jesus Chris . And order ha hey may no t s the s st s t s s e cape , Pope in i , and af er everal line , “ ends all by these words All of whom g uos omnes have been rejected from the Church by divine con ” i n de mnat o .

s sts t as u as u s S . Leo in i , hen , here , m ch h man word

t ts t o o u t t s t t t s . can insi He repea y hree ime , ha here ‘ ‘ ‘ ’ to u ! ! t . s s o is no excep ion He ay y , all all all

ou o u t t t i t to and y , y main ain ha he n ended make an 43

t to o n t s t the t t the excep ion , and chang e hi poin ex of Council ! No man o f good faith c an deny this triple afﬁrma tion of the Monothelite heresy of Honori us . t . i t s s Pope S . Leo II s hen in thi ca e perfec ly and precisely in agreement with the canons o f the

u s f uéran er is Co ncil . The de ence of Dom G g over

t No t s thrown from beginning o end . a ingle word r s emain .

XV .

It must be stated that each defender of Honorius ” A t us is has his s s st . s own pecial y em heir ca e bad , “ s ssu t t t o ut o n an t aid Bo e , hey canno hold y poin ; ‘ no t ns t s s having any ﬁrm mea , hey are alway eeking ‘ fresh ones they pass from o ne line o f arg ument t o ”

t t t s s t . ano her, being well aware ha each e cape hem

the u t t o sa s t t he Some have had a daci y y, in pi e of

su t the ss t t t the ts as ab rdi y of a er ion , ha all fac and p

t us falsiﬁc ations a sag es ag ains Honori were . Even t t s s t t s o f t s s t hi pre en ime , a few weak echoe hi de pera e means are t o be found .

O t s sa t t the two tt s o f us her y only, ha le er Honori ,

‘ su tt t o the u t which were bmi ed Co ncil , were par ly falsiﬁed whilst the most part maintain that the true

tt s o f us our s to t st st le er Honori are in hand , e ify , ag ain the t e u s to the t t hr e Co ncil , perfec or hodoxy o f his teaching . O t s m t t t the t u s t her ad i ha hree Co ncil have , in fac , us b ut t t o ut o f the t condemned Honori ; ha , eig h or 44

ten s t s st t t ri us name of here ic , among which ha of Hono ‘ ’ is u the heretical s heretical fo nd , word mean for all the t s b ut s not heretical us o her , doe mean for Honori

s him elf alone .

O t s su s M M r De c am a r. . h s her , ch g Manning and g p , say simply that the three Councils were mistaken

a e t o a e tt o f t from g g , and have commi ed an error fac t t the tt s o f us t the s ha le er Honori , in fac , are in hand o f st t o everybody, and exi , happily , prove clearly 1 the perfect orthodoxy of his teaching .

st t s w ho the t t of the tt s Among ho e prove , by ex le er

us the t t o f t s of Honori , perfec or hodoxy hi Pope , and w ho declare the three Councils victims o f an error “ f M r D c ham s s t us e us o t . e s fac , g p peak h Pop Honori admits the tw o natures in Jesus Christ therefore he ‘ ” u t s th tw s m s admit the tw o operation and e o will .

s s is s s the t l t s Thi rea oning fal e , ince all Mono he i e t i admit the tw o natures in Jesus Chris . This s exactly why Bossuet begins his dissertation on this point by these words L e t us no t forg et that all the ” ‘ t t t th w ur u Mono heli es admi e t o nat es in Jes s Christ .

ut r D h m s t u t s s B M . e c a s s s s g p in i , and he q o e ome word

us s to the tw o of Honori , which eem, indeed , proclaim Ope rations in Jesus Christ The Lord Jesus Christ ‘ has e t t s s His op ra ed hing divine , by mean of man ‘ hood and operated thing s human in a ‘ manner ineffable D ominum J esum Chris tum ‘ o eratum divina media humanitate p , ” umde ue o eratum humana ine abilit r e mg p jf e .

1 It is b e si es d- ro os t o rec all the act t at we a e not the e c n etter , d , p p f , h h v S o d L in full.

But is not the Ecthesis o f Heraclius itself copied from the letter o f Honorius

us t it is s s o f Th , hen, clearly hown , by a compari on

the ss s t t us s s t all pa ag e , ha Honori peak exac ly like all th t t s s is the e o her Monothelite here ic . Thi opinion of Natalis Alexander ; and it is that o f Thomassin and “ o f t s w ho the o f us many o her , reg ard decree Honori as being the foundation o f the Ecthesis and the T ” 1 yp e.

M D ham s is st O t s r. e c st t s her , and g p ill among hi

u s t o the t s the n mber, oppo e dog ma ic decree of

( u al u s ssa s ut s Ec menic Co ncil a few pa g e from a hor ,

t o r no t st t o us. con emporary , who rove defend Honori

o f t s s s is u M r De cham s Each he e pas ag e q oted by g . p w t o f t u t s s i h a cry ri mph , accompanied by hi apo ” tro he o u t t t ! p Do y hear ha , my Fa her

It is s as t o t t t t preci ely if, main ain ha a law vo ed by the legislature and applied by the executive power is no t o f the m t e to t t a law king do , hey wer prove ha ,

ur the s uss the t s s s d ing di c ion , before vo e , ome peaker

s st it u the tu s had poken ag ain , and d ring cen rie which

s s n the st c o f the s had elap ed i ce exi en e law, ome u n i authors had disc ssed a d criticised t .

is s te - There no de pera loop hole , no fable , no ‘ — ’ contrivance o r shift (all these words are Bo ssue t s)

- to which some author o r other has not had re ‘ u s t ut s o f the s m t as co r e , wi ho peaking era e en of p ‘ ” s the h sag e and iding away of manuscripts .

' 1 f s o See en u : The Ca e H onorius . 39 . R o f , p 47

But all these defenders tog ether forg et this advice of g ood sense

Too many expedients spoil a business . ” t Le t us have b ut one b ut le t i be g ood .

t s s t s st m . Now , hi i he new y e which M de Marg erie '

t s it to M r. has recently discovered . To hi I leave g

Héfélé to who s s has u s reply , , a few day ince , p bli hed

t t t s s to . s in an wer M de Marg erie , a very hor rea i e ,

t s u the u st o f us. deﬁni ive and deci ive , pon q e ion Honori

t s to it L e t us listen to it . I limi my elf abridging a i little n translating .

XVI . “ H l is t t s s M r. éfé é Here , hen , ay g , a new me hod

‘ s the u st o f n us t s of olving q e ion Ho ori , recen ly propo ed

a t t t t P o e by M . de M rg erie , in a rac en i led p

Ho rius 1 no s 87 0 st t t . , Pari , (ag ain Fa her Gra ry ) This author arg ues thus “ P t 1 . his tw o tt s s the ope Ag a ho , in le er , declare

t the t infallibili y of Roman Pon iff. “ 2 t u h s s s . The Six h Co ncil a olemnly anctioned

t s tw o tt s t t the f t o f he e le er , and wi h hem in allibili y ‘ the Pope . “ It is not ss t t t th 3 . e e s u po ible , h n, ha ame Co ncil

u at the s t co ld , ame ime , have condemned Pope ‘ ” s t s Honorius a here ical properly o called .

L t us ne t s t t s e o s . examine , one by , he e hree he e

Did Agatho in hi s letters de clare po ntiﬁ c al infals lib ility This is what he said 48

‘ u this s iritual t The Roman Ch rch , p Mo her, will ‘ never be convicted o f having abandoned Apostolical tradition never has she yielded to here sy Hoes ‘ spiritualis mater a tramite ap os tolicce

traditionis nun uam errasse robabitur nec hoereticis q p , ” novitatibus d r t M it. an e ava a su ubu s i . X cc L . p ( , v , pp 229

t ts s t t o st s Ag a ho limi him elf, hen , e abli hing an t t t th u h st . : e as hi orical fac , viz ha Roman Ch rch never

t t s t t it n fallen in o heresy . He main ain ha ever will

But s no t s o f the s fall into it . he doe peak per onal

o f th infallibility e Pope .

t the f t the Now , we may admi in allibili y of Roman

u h t ut tt the s al a i t Ch rc , wi ho admi ing per on inf ll bili y of

t t h s t the . a t e Pope And we may admi , ame ime , these tw o propositions : that Honorius has prescribed

t u and t t the u an he erodox form la , ha Roman Ch rch has never been given up to the heresy o f Mono li m the s .

s tt o f t ss to the The econd le er Ag a ho , addre ed

the st is no t st u t Emperor, like ﬁr , and which an In r c ion

the t s f s s t t the C u for Leg a e , a ﬁrm al o ha Roman h rch

t s has never fallen in o here y .

do t . t s Where we ﬁnd wha M de Marg erie main ain ,

: t t t t u t the s li t of viz . ha Ag a ho a g h per onal infallibi y the Pope . There is no trace at all of this assertion in the two

f t . letters o S . Ag a ho t in The second thesis of M . de Marg erie is as li tle

w t t u a th s It is no t t u t t accordance i h r th s e ﬁr t . r e ha

o f t : as to the st t th t us Ag a ho re , hey ana ema ize Honori .

But is the sermo ros /zo i s h here p p net eu of w ich M . de Marg erie speaks thus

It is t ss to i i t , I hink , impo ible mag ne an approba ion more solemn and more explicit t o a declaration more ” st t the t t di inc of infallibilis doc rine .

t is t t st t or Now , here here no declara ion , ei her di inc

t s o f the st t th is o herwi e , infallibili doc rine ; and ere no

t t t t t s approba ion , ei her explici or implici , of hi t doc rine . The Council does no t say a single word upon

ntiﬁ l s t has o c a t . i t e p infallibili y When xclaim , Pe er s t it is s ut l u st poken by Ag a ho , ab ol ely on y a q e ion

the t o f the tw o s Mansi . c . of doc rine will ( , l ,

t ust s s p . and hey had j aid , a few line higher u W e v su t t o at T he o do p, ha e bjec ed an hema ‘ s ns us t t t t i , Serg i , and og e her wi h hem Honorius who has followed them in their ” doctrine .

us t is st a n t t Th , here no ve ig e of y approba ion wha ever for the pretended doct rine o f pontiﬁ c al infalli ilit b y.

The emptiness o f the system o f M . de Marg erie is thus seen to be proved . But a few examples will teach us better the

character of his writing . The most embarrassing point in the letters of “ Honorius is this phrase : W e teach a single will in

‘ ” us st J es Chri . 5 1

d i n mu t s t t t s s t M . e Marg erie s a e ha hi propo i ion

tr u r u as may have been in od ced by f a d ; and, if he

s r it u t s the é had di covered a new p oof of , he q o e Abb h us u t s t e é m . Maxim , who q o e Abb John of Ro e

t t s st Now, bo h of hem , we have een , in ead of weaken

the e st o f the tr u s ss t ing xi ence o ble ome pa ag e , bo h , I sa str t it u t us it y, eng hen by q o ing , by way of exc ing , w tt u t he e ss s . , v ry pa ag e ri en by Honori

t . . r t Ano her example M de Ma gerie , af er having

f m t s t s s tru v o ne t t the t a ﬁr ed hi he i , ly a no el , ha Six h

u has the t the has Co ncil decreed infallibili y of Pope , manifestly a nee d o f ﬁnding a means o f explaining the t e u e a st the r t ana h ma h rl d g ain he e ical Pope .

he who s s s . s t t t s Now, earche , ﬁnd He ﬁnd ha hi

’ w ‘ t l w as t t t t ord here ica aken, every ime ha Hono

us is u st in u t t t ri in q e ion , q i e ano her meaning han

the t s ns t at for o her , and no long er mea here ical all .

. s s t Finally, M de Marg erie give him elf ex reme trouble t o prove that Pope Honorius did no t speak

x c r But t is the use e athed a . t s wha of proving hi , if his tt s t has no t n le er are or hodox , and if he bee condemned for heresy

Le t us se e t t t us , however, how hey prove ha Honori

d no t s e cath r di peak x ed a .

u ex cathedra s s o ur ut To prono nce , ay a hor, there must be a positive assertion proposed as an ‘ rt t s no t r u a icle of fai h . Doe Hono i s put forth the ‘ positive assertion that follows : Unarn ve luntatem 52

‘ fate rnnr domini f em Christi W e confess o ne “ ’ s su ingle will in J e s Christ . “ Here is another which follows : W e have no t ‘ found in the holy letters either o ne o r tw o operations ‘ in J e sus Christ ; b ut we admit that he operated in “ “ ’ many ways N os non naarn ope ratione m vel anas ’ acris itte ris e rce irnns se a mult ar s l p p , if ” it r o o vi r m e c n rnns e atu . a si n . . g op m (M , v xi , p But could it be that Honorius does no t propose these positive afﬁrmations t o the faith o f Christians ? “ ” “ u t t s t t us t s May yo r fra erni y, aid he , each wi h he e

t s w ho t o u to the hing ; we , exhor y avoid new ‘ “ formula o f one or o f tw o operations H a t nobiscnrn f rate rnitas vestra pra ctice t ho rtantes vos at unius vel g emina no va vocis inductnrn ” ‘

&c . Ibi . o ra i nis vocabalnrn an u ientes d . pe t o f g , ( p

st his s e st s More clearly ill, in econd pi le , Honoriu “ writes A s to that which concerns the dog ma o f the

‘ ur t i s is t ust and t : C h ch , h wha we m hold each we not deﬁne in the Mediator either o ne will o r tw o wills

t is s t t 81s s t o the Here , hen , a po i ive he propo ed

But an objection is made that Honorius did not pro

t o f t t o the u to the pose this ar icle fai h whole Ch rch ,

st tut s t o . whole world, which con i e , according M de

the tw o s o f the t ex Marg erie , one of mark deﬁni ion

cathedra .

5 4

“ fhat H onor ius s eahin ‘ t tau ht , p g ex ca hedra , g

I ask those among st us who have studied the ques

t the st to u t o u ion mo , be g ood eno g h read fo r p ag es

the t s 5 4 5 5 5 6 5 7 o f t t che forming chap er , , , and , ha f ’ “ d ce a vre o f ssu t e t t G allia rth x , Bo e , n i led , O odo a

” ' ’ P ra via Disse rta i t o . t s res ume ast s s t If hi oni he hem ,

and l s t t m t - hi ﬁ l hem wi h ad ira ion , w ch I have already

s s t s —le t t t n a the een happen everal ime , hem he re d “ more extended Treatise in the Defe nce of the D ec/a ” l ration .

t th t a o u the a Af er reading a , read g ain , if y can , m ny pamphlets which have j ust been written within the

st t s u f u la few mon h in favo r o Honori s . If you are

t te t it s s t o ss t t really a n ive , eem me impo ible ha

o u s u no t o n the the ﬁ rm y ho ld perceive , one hand , and brig ht truth c onformable t o the traditions o f the

u t the e t to the s t t Ch rch , aken from igh h ix een h cen tu t o n the t the s o f t ry ; hen , o her hand , g limmer lig h

the s the s t s t e ﬂb rts and moke , oli ary and de pera e , and all those marks o f confused error o f which Bossuet ' ’ says so well N e c inira rn varie s f uisse ac t repzaos ‘ ’ ’ ai t ot a nai ae coarc tati ar ume ntis ab loco eae rn g g g , g p

‘ “ e re nt non habe re nt No r is it u t at ﬁ g , wonderf l h

‘ t h n u on s s hey were c a geable and fearf l who , all ide ‘ so u ts overwhelmed by many arg men , had no ﬁrm ” t g round whereon t o rest their fee .

1 i i ten e reatise i . o i i . s e De ensio c arat onis i II . xx t De l i l b . c V . f , , xxv Th x d d T occupies only ten pag es of two columns each in the edition of Ganme lib .

ix. 3 45 . p . 5 5

But it ss ou t o t t the , if were impo ible for y en er in o

t a t s s tu at st is s th de il of hi dy , here, lea , ome ing which

is e cl ar .

u s t t t the t o f S ppo e , for a momen , ha condemna ion

n r us w as an t t t his Ho o i error of fac , or ha name had

r u u t s t the st o f t s —su been f a d len ly in er ed in li here ic , p

s t s r su — u the s us po i ion , moreove , ab rd , wo ld adver e ca e

the t t it ? ust u ust ut t o r be any be er for J or nj , a hen ic

the t o f us w as t apocryphal , condemna ion Honori accep

as ut t and e t t the u ed a hen ic l gi ima e by whole Ch rch ,

the W st as the st ( c u u s in e in Ea , by E menical Co ncil

s It is t t u s th t and by Pope . only wi hin hree cent rie a it is sought t o evade this g reat fact and its c o nse

ue nc s t t e . re the u q The fore , whole Ch rch believed ha

t ff in st s ac t u a Sovereig n Pon i , a mo olemn , co ld be

t a u u c m as s . here ic l , and o ld be conde ned ch Therefore , the Catholic Church and its leaders were then e ntirely strangers t o the systems in virtue o f which they

e t ss h e rro ne d clare every hing impo ible , apocryp al ,

o us .

s e le t us ask how r s Thi b ing laid down , , in p e ence

o f t s t a t t s t a f u t t ut hi grea f c and hi capi l di ﬁc l y, wi ho s so t s t r t o t s s peaking of many o her , hey da e face he e rock , at the s s t s s st ri k of eeing hem elve overwhelmed by hi ory ,

u t s nt the u t sh e s u if ever, pon hi poi , f ll ligh in pon all

s the the t r t su t eye , in meaning of adi ion ppor ed by all h t e witnesse s w hom we have quoted .

But wh t no t t u t the ht s y, hen , wai n il lig break

t u t s t u for h for all , pon hi poin and pon many 5 6

t s at t s s t t t o o her Why, hi pre en ime , do violence

t t the u the s s s the a g rea par of Ch rch , brave chi m ,

t s the s s the s the u t s indig na ion , de pair , fall , ren ncia ion

o f the t t the ss t Ca holic fai h , and impo ibili y for

tu s e t o f the s t s cen rie y , bring ing back epara ed Chri tians ? Why treat the p e aceful and humble assembly “ of the faithful as it never ye t has been treat ed W hy tread under foot t he conviction of so larg e a “ ” u us o u the t s is n mber We will cr h y by vo e ,

the t t o f t t s the u t t hrea poli ical par ie in For m , a hrea

u t of the s s o f and t the nwor hy chool learning fai h , and t t s th u W h no t s e . heolog ical par ie in Ch rch y eek ,

the u n t o f the in learning and prayer, holy na imi y

e of ? W h su t e s s ut childr n God y in l , d pi e , o rag e , crush under foot hundreds o f doctors and bishops ;

t us s o f the t u e t us intelli ho and fai hf l , nligh ened , zealo ,

t - s ou t u s g en , well informed , who e life y ro ble , who e conscience yo u g rieve 2 “ L u t t u t s t ove , ni y , chari y, nanimi y , a ingle hear , a ” s s u t s the s t t he e sus ingle o l , all hi , all piri of Lord J ,

is no t t s the su t ut r t the hi preme r h , living , p ac ical , condition and proof o f dog matic truth

A s t o it ss to me , if were po ible for me overwhelm ,

t o f t t s t t us by a vo e majori y, ho e who now hrea en , and

s t o st us s t act l who wi h de roy if, by a ecre of my wi l ,

t the st t s t u no t I could crea e exi ence of hi vo e , I wo ld

s s w u s u t s ac t o f . prod ce hi will Thi candal , hich wo nd

l k t er e m Thus spea s Fa h N w an.

mn s unanimiter 5 o ﬁv a85v in eodeml c 2 Erant o e ( p p ) o o

5 8

the t o f t . st t love for hrone S Pe er, and mo venera ion

the rs o f the s t t t b ut for pe on Pope , wha are hey , hen, the necessary curb which God impo ses upon every su ut u st ? t s u u k to - dden o b r If hi c rb co ld be bro en day , you would tomorro w enter upon that o f all the ag es of the Church which would show the le ast love for the t th st fo r t o f . t and e t hrone S Pe er, lea conﬁdence all ha

m But le t us t t it which co es from Rome . hope ha will

u t t s t t o ur sus st be q i e o herwi e , and ha Lord Je Chri

u t s s will sa ve His Ch rch from he e formidable dang er .

inte r and kse lle r 1 0 rt S t re e t ri t n . G . ake lin Pr , , g W g, Boo , 7 No h B h o

B Y T HE S A ME A U T H O R .

ENGLISH ORDERS AND PAPAL SUPREMA Y C .

B A L Y TH E REv . . J . I B . A T B EY, .

n n and f r : J M S P ! A N D Co 3 . 77 tran . Lo do Ox o d A E AR ER , , S d t : ! IN G r n G . W N r t treet . B ig h o A EL , o h S

P rice 1 8 . 6d .

ORDINUM SACRORUM IN ECCLESIA ANGLICANA DEFENSIO

A F N C O F H O Y O S I N T H E CH U CH O F N G N DE E E L RDER R E LA D,

I NC LU DI N G

The tatute s cuments and t er i ence attestin the ali it An lican S , Do , o h Ev d g v d y of g ’ r ers it a ac s imile the ec r Arc b is Parker s nsecrati n O d ; w h f of R o d of h hop Co o , hotoz inco ra he d b ermissi n His Grace the Arc bis ant erb ur p g p , y p o of h hop of C y , r m the e ister in the Arc ie isc al Lib rar at Lam et f o R g h p op y b h . ! i IN L n n and r J M S P . r t n : G . ! G o do Oxfo d : A E AR ER Co B g h o WA EL .

i 3 1 5 6 lar e o io . P r c 30 . l e pp , g f

ECHAMPS ARCHB SHOP OE LETTER OF MGR. B , I D ANL U BI H MAL NES TO MGR. UP O P S OP I , , OF ORLEANS ; AND T V FATHER GRATR BY LETTERS O THE RE . Y, H H OF MAL N S HAM ARC B S OP E . MGR. DEC PS . I I

FI L OR I D I . RST ETTER, NTRO UCT ON

TRANSLATED BY P ERMISSIO N .

Price Is . 6d.

IRST SE OND AND THIRD LETTERS TO F , C ,

BE HAMPS BY A. GRATRY MGR. C , , m t Oratoire Member o the A cade . Priest of he , f y

T RANSLAT ED B Y P ERMISSIO N .

h. P rice 18 . eac

S ll Place at n uare IMP ! IN M SH L n n : J . . Y L a ; , o do T HA E , y , E o Sq S AR ALL

Pat ern ster . AND Co . , o Row

W ! IN G N rt treet . i t n G . Br g h o : A EL , o h S