Vatican Council

VATICAN COUNCIL. - The twentieth and last ecumenical council, opened by Pius IX on 8 December 1869 in the Vatican Basilica and interrupted by the occupation of Rome (20 September 1870).

I. PREPARATION

The idea of an ecumenical council was first communicated by Pius IX, in secret form, on 6 Dec. 1864 to the cardinals of the Sacred Congregation of Rites and shortly afterward to all those residing in the Curia, asking them to express, after mature examination, their opinion on the advisability of the initiative. Of the 21 cardinals consulted, 19 replied favorably, also indicating the subjects that ought to be treated; then the Pope constituted (March 1865) a cardinalitial commission (Patrizi, Reisach, Panebianco, Bizzarri, Caterini) for the preparations of the Council and, on the advice of this commission, created various subcommissions or deputations: for doctrine (Card. Bilio), for discipline (Card. Capalti), for the religious orders (Card. Bizzarri), for the Eastern rites and the missions (Card. Barnabò), for politico-ecclesiastical questions (Card. Reisach); he sent confidential letters to more than 40 bishops of the West and the East, distinguished for doctrine and pastoral zeal, inviting them to point out the subjects they considered most important, and appointed consultors competent in the various branches of ecclesiastical science, choosing them from the Curia and from the various Catholic countries.

The prompt and enthusiastic response of the bishops consulted would have determined Pius IX to convoke the Council for the centenary of the martyrdom of the apostles Peter and Paul (1867), but the political difficulties of the moment forced him to postpone it; nevertheless, to the numerous bishops (more than 500) who had come to Rome for the occasion he gave the official announcement in the secret Consistory of 26 June 1867; the following year he promulgated the bull Aeterni Patris (29 June 1868), by which he convoked the ecumenical Council for 8 Dec. 1869. All residential and titular bishops were convoked, as well as the abbots general of the monastic orders, the abbots nullius, and the superiors general of the religious orders. The heads of the Catholic states were not invited, because practically everywhere the Church was separated from the State; instead there were invited (letter Arcano divinae providentiae, 8 Sept. 1868) the patriarchs and the dissident bishops of the Eastern Church, who responded with a disdainful silence and a flat refusal, and the Protestants (exhortation Jam vos omnes, 13 Sept. 1868), who received the proposal as a provocation, with the exception of a few Lutheran pastors and some Anglicans.

The announcement of the Council threw public opinion into agitation; international Freemasonry, on the proposal of the deputy Ricciardi, resolved to hold an anti-council at Naples, to which Giuseppe Garibaldi, Victor Hugo, and Ausonio Franchi (v.) adhered; the various European states, all dominated by liberalism, showed themselves distrustful; Prince Hohenlohe, foreign minister in Bavaria, sent a circular to all the cabinets to provoke a collective protest against the feared religio-political decisions to be issued by the forthcoming Council; the proposal was not taken seriously, and practically the bishops of all countries were able to go freely to Rome, and the Council met with no opposition from the states, which nevertheless kept watch, through wary observers, over all the movements of the Roman Court and of the episcopal assembly. In the Catholic camp the news of the Council was received with particular satisfaction: distinguished prelates, such as Msgr. Pie of Poitiers, Msgr. Dechamps of Malines, Msgr. Martin of Paderborn, Msgr. Manning of Westminster, Msgr. Ghilardi of Mondovì, Msgr. Zinelli of Treviso, prepared the faithful for the great event with books and pastoral letters; the press (the Civiltà Cattolica, the Unità cattolica, the Univers, the Stimmen aus Maria Laach) echoed the teaching of the bishops, defending the Council from the attacks of its adversaries.

Even the Gallicans and the French liberals at first looked favorably on Pius IX's initiative, in the hope that the Council would modernize the norms of canon law and diminish the power of the Roman Curia; but they immediately changed their minds when the Civiltà Cattolica of 6 Febr. 1869, reporting a correspondence from France, gave reason to foresee that the Council would be very brief, proposing to approve, in positive form, the whole body of doctrine set forth in the Sillabo (v.), and expressed the wish that the infallibility of the pope be defined "by acclamation." The article, regarded as a genuine expression of Roman circles, stirred up a strong controversy between the two tendencies, which immediately took shape everywhere. Almost no one denied the Pope the prerogative of infallibility; very few (Manning held that at the Council there were no more than five) made it depend on the consent of the Church (the Gallican doctrine, upheld by Msgr. Maret, 1869); the polemic therefore unfolded between those who deemed its definition opportune (opportunists), so that, with every doubt removed concerning a truth universally believed, the prestige of the Church might increase and she, henceforth wholly centered in her head, might with greater force repel the attacks of unbelief (the majority), and those who judged it inopportune (inopportunists), for fear that society would become ever more detached from the Church and that the conversion of the Easterners and the Protestants would become more difficult (the minority).

In France there distinguished themselves, as opportunists, Msgr. Plantier of Nîmes and the Benedictine abbot Guéranger (v.), flanked by the Belgian Msgr. Dechamps (v.), who then published the well-known pamphlet L'infallibilité et le Concile général (June 1869), widely approved by the Pope, and by Veuillot (v.), director of L'Univers. These were strongly attacked by Msgr. Dupanloup (v.) and by Montalembert (v.), director of the Correspondant, who were in turn supported by Msgr. Darboy, archbishop of Paris, by Msgr. Freppel (v.), bishop of Angers, and by Fr. Gratry (v.). In Germany Döllinger (v.) wrote against the Civiltà Cattolica, under the pseudonym Janus, his famous Der Papst und Konzil, consisting of 5 articles published in the Allgemeine Zeitung of Augsburg, in which he went so far as to define the papacy as "a tumor that disfigures the Church." No bishop adhered to it, but several deemed the definition of infallibility inopportune because of the conditions of the moment, and indeed expressed this opinion in the collective letter drawn up at the assembly of Fulda: the most open and decided were Msgr. Scherr of Munich, Msgr.

Ketteler (v.) of Mainz, Msgr. Hefele (v.) of Rottenburg, to whom joined various bishops of the Austro-Hungarian Empire: Card. Rauscher of Vienna, Card. Schwarzenberg of Prague, Msgr. Haynald of Kalocsa, Msgr. Strossmayer of Diakovar. On the other hand, Msgr. Senestrey of Regensburg, Msgr. Martin of Paderborn, and Msgr. Gasser of Bressanone ranged themselves decidedly in favor of infallibility.

II. INAUGURATION AND PROCEDURE OF THE COUNCIL

On the appointed date (Dec. 8, 1869) Pius IX solemnly opened the Council, delivering a moving address in the presence of more than 700 bishops and 20,000 pilgrims. The episcopate truly represented the whole Catholic world: 200 Italians, 70 French, 40 Austro-Hungarians, 36 Spaniards, 19 Irish, 18 Germans, 12 English, 19 from other European countries. The East had sent about 30 bishops, the United States 40, Canada 9, Latin America 30, the missionary regions about 100.

The procedure of the Council had been fixed by the apostolic constitution Multiplices inter. Five deputations, each made up of 24 bishops (chosen by secret ballot by the Fathers of the Council), presided over by a cardinal, prepared, using the material elaborated by the theologians, the schemas and the arguments to be submitted to the deliberation of the Council. The schemas were then distributed to the Fathers some time before the discussion, so that they might propose the appropriate amendments and modifications. The schemas thus corrected were sent back to the deputations, which, having revised them according to the proposals put forward, redistributed them to the Fathers, by whom they were discussed in the general congregations, presided over by five cardinals. When a schema, after more or less profound modifications made in the successive conciliar debates, had obtained the approval of the majority, it was brought to the public session, at which the Pope was present, who after the vote of the Fathers (expressed by placet or non placet), promulgated the definition. The Council held 86 general congregations and 4 public sessions (Dec. 8, 1869 [inauguration], Jan. 6 [profession of faith], Apr. 24 [const. Dei Filius], July 18, 1870 [const. Pastor aeternus]).

III. THE DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION "DEI FILIUS"

In the first general congregation (Dec. 10, 1869) the schema of the dogmatic constitution entitled De doctrina catholica contra multiplices errores ex rationalismo derivatos, compiled by Frs. Franzelin (v.) and Schrader (v.), was distributed to the Fathers. The schema, though praised for its content and its erudition, did not please because of the prolixity of its development, its abstract terminology, and the harshness of its style. Accordingly the president of the dogmatic deputation entrusted the bishops Dechamps, Pie and Martin with reworking the exposition; Martin, to whom the work was entrusted in a particular way, availed himself of Fr. Kleutgen (v.), who at the end of Feb. 1870 presented a schema widely praised by the Fathers for the transparency of its ideas, the harmony of its parts and the purity of its style. The discussions, opened in the general congregation of March 14, led to successive modifications and improvements, up to the solemn definition, which took place unanimously on Apr. 24. It is the celebrated constitution De fide catholica, called Dei Filius from its opening words, which struck at the root the errors of the modern age (pantheism, materialism, rationalism), opposing to them a dense and luminous exposition of Catholic doctrine on God, Revelation, faith, and the relations of reason to faith. After a solemn prologue, the first chapter proclaims the existence of a personal God, free creator of all things, absolutely independent of the material and spiritual world created by him (Denz-U, 1781-84). The second chapter affirms that certain religious truths, above all the existence of God, can be known with certainty by the powers of human reason alone. This was the open condemnation not only of atheism, but also of fideism and traditionalism; the same chapter added that for the other transcendent divine truths, called mysteries (v. MISTERO), supernatural Revelation (v.) was necessary, and it took up again the doctrine of the Council of Trent on its sources: Scripture and Tradition (Denz-U, 1785-88). The third chapter, while vindicating the rational character of faith (against the sentimentalism of Protestant tendency), presents it at the same time as a free adherence to supernatural truths and a gift of the Grace of God (against Hermesianism: v. HERAES). It further affirms, in harmony with the thought of Card. Dechamps, that the Church, guardian of the deposit of faith, bears in herself the signs of her divine origin (Denz-U, 1789-94). The fourth chapter, having affirmed a clear distinction between faith and reason, recalls that an apparent opposition between science and religion can arise only from an error regarding the doctrine proposed by the latter or from a false idea regarding the conclusions of the former. It adds, against Günther (v.), that of the mysteries properly so called, on this earth, it will always be possible to demonstrate the absence of repugnance, without however being able to unveil their intimate content (Denz-U, 1795-1800). This doctrinal exposition is followed by 18 dogmatic canons, which condemn, in the form of anathemas, the opposite errors (Denz-U, 1881-20).

IV. THE DEFINITION OF PONTIFICAL INFALLIBILITY

On 21 January 1870 a Schema constitutionis dogmaticae de Ecclesia Christi in 15 chapters had been distributed to the Fathers, in which, however, no mention was made of papal infallibility. On 9 February the majority asked that the subject be inscribed, especially in view of the heated controversies that were being stirred up on that point, both inside and outside the Council; it was held that passing over that doctrine in silence after so many discussions was equivalent to prejudicing its value before the whole Church. Accordingly the saying spread: «quod inopportunum dixerunt, necessarium fecerunt», and the debates on the matter were hastened, with the presentation (6 March) of a schema in which only De Romano Pontifice eiusque infallibili magisterio was treated.

The minority, led by the intelligent and combative leaders already mentioned, first protested against the change of program, then organized a strong resistance (letters to the Pope and to Cardinal Antonelli, a visit by Msgr. Dupanloup to Pius IX to induce him to prevent discussion of the new schema, an international committee for the publication of articles and pamphlets against infallibility, an appeal to Napoleon III and to the minister Ollivier), which was crushed by the resolute will of the majority. Accordingly 34 general congregations were devoted to the subject, in which the minority had full freedom to express its own opinion. After the infallibilist speakers (above all Manning, who appealed to his experience as a convert, and Dechamps, who spoke with the maturity of an accomplished theologian) had set out the arguments in favor of the definition, the theologians of the minority rebutted point by point the arguments adduced, exaggerated the historical difficulties, focusing especially on the case of Pope Honorius. The other side responded by sifting the difficulties, examining the texts in question, discussing the case of Honorius, the reply of Pope Hormisdas, the doctrine of St. Thomas and of St. Antoninus of Florence, the scope of the definition of the Council of Florence. The original schema underwent numerous modifications and improvements, up to the general congregation of 13 July, in which the now definitive formula (masterfully illustrated by Msgr. Gasser) received 451 placet, 88 non placet, 62 placet iuxta modum. In order to achieve in the public session an increased majority of votes, the deputation revised the schema according to the latest suggestions, but firmly rejected the proposal to insert a phrase indicating the assent of the Church as a condition of the Pontiff's infallibility; indeed, to the already clear formula «ideoque eiusmodi Romani Pontificis definitiones esse ex se irreformabiles», there was added «non autem ex consensu Ecclesiae»; with this clause Gallicanism received its death blow. Once the definitive redaction of the schema had been approved in the last general congregation (16 July), it was established that the public session would be held on 18 July. Fifty-five Fathers of the minority, having made in vain the last attempt to obtain from the Pope the suspension of the public session, left Rome after signing a declaration in which they affirmed that, out of the veneration and respect they had for His Holiness, they preferred to abstain from the public session rather than pronounce the non placet before the Pope. On the 18th came the solemn proclamation of the dogma, in which all 535 Fathers present (except two, who through a misunderstanding said non placet) were unanimous in approving the dogmatic constitution, to which Pius IX affixed his infallible sanction.

The constitution Pastor aeternus treats, in four concise and lucid chapters, of the primacy of jurisdiction of St. Peter over the Apostolic College (Denz-U, 1821-23), of the perpetual transmission of the same prerogative in the person of his successors in the Roman Chair (ibid., 1824-25), of the intimate nature of the papal primacy, as a truly episcopal, ordinary, immediate, universal power (ibid., 1826-31), of the personal prerogative of infallibility, which the Roman Pontiff enjoys through a special charism, when as universal teacher (ex cathedra) he proposes doctrines or settles questions concerning faith and morals (ibid., 1832-40 [v. INFALLIBILITÀ; PRIMATO DI S. PIETRO E DEL ROMANO PONTEFICE]).

Once the personal infallibility of the pope was admitted without contestation, all the subterfuges for evading obedience to the Church fell away; a decision of the Roman Pontiff is henceforth for every believer a norm to be followed without discussion.

V. AFTER THE COUNCIL

The conciliar definitions were received with jubilation by all the faithful. Even the bishops of the minority submitted in a praiseworthy manner. The four cardinals (Rauschen, Schwarzenberg, Mathieu, Hohenlohe) who had abstained from the public session drew up an open profession of faith, which they delivered directly to the Pope. Dupanloup, having reached his diocese, announced the definition that had taken place with a pastoral letter and from Bordeaux sent Pius IX a sincere act of adherence to the work of the Council. Maret himself openly rejected the errors contained in his book; Gratry, on his deathbed (1871), issued a profession of faith with a letter to the Archbishop of Paris. Guibert.

In Germany, all the bishops showed their loyalty by publishing the decrees of the Council. Only Döllinger obstinately refused his submission, which was expressly requested by the Archbishop of Munich and vainly urged by friends and admirers; he refused, however, to join the Church of the Old Catholics (v.), which had as its head Reinkens (v.), professor at Breslau, suspended a divinis for his harsh polemic against the Council. In France there occurred the sensational apostasy of the Carmelite Loyson (v.), who joined the Old Catholics. Opposition to the decrees of the Council arose in England on the part of Lord Gladstone; in Austria, which denounced the Concordat with the Holy See; in Bavaria, which protected the rebellious priests; in Switzerland, which banished from its territory the bishops Mermillod (v.) and Sachat and 84 parish priests of the Jura.

Antonio Piolanti