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, on 6 December 1864 to the cardinals of the Sacred Congregation of Rites and shortly thereafter to all those residing in the Curia, asking them to express, after careful consideration, their opinion on the advisability of the initiative. Of the 21 cardinals consulted, 19 responded favorably, also indicating the topics that should be addressed. The Pope then established (March 1865) a cardinals’ commission (Patrizzi, Reisch, Panebianco, Bizzarri, Caterini) for the preparations of the Council, and on its advice created various subcommittees or deputations: for doctrine (Card. Bilio), for discipline (Card. Capalti), for religious orders (Card. Bizzarri), for Eastern rites and missions (Card. Barnabò), and for politico-ecclesiastical questions (Card. Reisch). He sent confidential letters to more than 40 bishops of the West and East, distinguished for their learning and pastoral zeal, inviting them to indicate the topics they considered most important, and appointed competent consultants in the various branches of ecclesiastical science, selecting them from the Curia and from various Catholic countries.The prompt and enthusiastic response of the consulted bishops would have led 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 compelled him to postpone II. 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 fine encyclical *Aeterni Patris* (29 June 1868), in which he announced the ecumenical council for 8 December 1869. All residential and titular bishops, the abbots general of monastic orders, the abbots *nullius*, and the superiors general of religious orders were convoked. The heads of Catholic states were not invited, since in practice the Church was separated from the state everywhere; instead, the patriarchs and dissident bishops of the Eastern Church were invited (letter *Arcano divinae providentiae*, 8 September 1868), who responded with indignant silence or outright refusal, as well as Protestants (exhortation *Jam vos omnes*, 13 September 1868), who received the proposal as a provocation, except for a few Lutheran pastors and some Anglicans.
The announcement of the Council stirred public opinion. International freemasonry, on the proposal of Deputy Ricciardi, decided to hold an anti-council in Naples, to which Giuseppe Garibaldi, Victor Hugo, Franchi (v.) adhered. The various European states, all dominated by liberalism, showed distrust. Prince Hohenlohe, the Bavarian minister of foreign affairs, sent a circular to all cabinets to provoke a collective protest against the feared politico-religious decisions to be issued by the upcoming Council; the proposal was not taken seriously, and in practice bishops from all countries were able to travel freely to Rome, and the Council encountered no opposition from the states, which, however, kept a watchful eye on all movements of the Roman Curia and the episcopal assembly through cautious observers. In the Catholic camp, the news of the Council was received with particular satisfaction: distinguished prelates such as Mons. Pic of Poitiers, Mons. Dechamps of Mechelen, Mons. Martin of Paderborn, Mons. Manning of Westminster, Mons. Ghilardi of Mondovì, and Mons. Zinelli of Treviso prepared the faithful for the great event through books and pastoral letters. The press (*La Civiltà Cattolica*, *L’Unità cattolica*, *L’Univers*, *Stimmen aus Maria Laach*) echoed the teaching of the bishops, defending the Council from the attacks of its adversaries.
Even the Gallicans and French liberals initially welcomed Pius IX’s initiative, hoping that the Council would modernize canon law and reduce the power of the Roman Curia. Their opinion changed, however, when *La Civiltà Cattolica* of 6 February 1869, reporting from France, predicted that the Council would be very brief, intending to approve positively the doctrinal complex enunciated in the *Syllabus* (v.) and expressing the wish that the infallibility of the pope be defined by acclamation. The article, considered an authentic expression of Roman circles, sparked a heated controversy between the two tendencies that immediately emerged everywhere. Almost no one denied the pope the prerogative of infallibility; very few (Manning believed there were no more than five in the Council) made it dependent on the consent of the Church (Gallican doctrine, upheld by Mons. Maret, 1869). The debate therefore took place between those who deemed its definition opportune (opportunists), so that, by removing any doubt about a universally believed truth, the prestige of the Church—now entirely centered on its head—might more forcefully repel the attacks of unbelief (majority), and those who judged it inopportune (inopportunists), fearing that society would become ever more estranged from the Church and that the conversion of Easterners and Protestants would become more difficult (minority).
In France, Mons. Plantier of Guéranger (v.), supported by the Belgian Mons. DECHAMPS, ADOLPHE (v.), who at that time published the well-known pamphlet *L’infallibilité et le Concile général* (June 1869), widely approved VEUILLOT, LOUIS (v.), director of *L’Univers*, were prominent among the opportunists. They were strongly opposed by Mons. Dupanloup (v.), by Montalambert (v.), director of *Le Correspondant*, who in turn were supported by Mons. Darboy, archbishop of Paris, by Mons. Freppel (v.), bishop of Angers, and by Fr. Gratry (v.). In Germany, Döllinger (v.) wrote against *La Civiltà Cattolica* under the pseudonym Janus, publishing his famous *Der Papst und Konzil* in five articles in the *Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung*, in which he went so far as to define the papacy as “a tumor that deforms the Church.” No bishop adhered to his views, though several considered the definition of infallibility inopportune given the circumstances; indeed, they expressed this opinion in the collective letter drafted at the Fulda assembly. The most open and decisive among them were Mons. Scherr of Munich, Mons. Ketteler (v.) of Mainz, and Mons. HEFELE, KARL JOSEPH VON (v.) of Rottenburg, joined by various bishops of the Austro-Hungarian Empire: Card. Rauscher of Vienna, Card. Schwarzenberg of Prague, Mons. Haynald of Kalocsa, and Mons. Strossmayer of Diakovar. On the other hand, those who firmly supported infallibility included Mons. Senestré of Regensburg, Mons. Martin of Paderborn, and Mons. Gasser of Brixen.
The inauguration and procedure of the Council, 1869. Pius IX solemnly opened the Council with an emotional address in the presence of more than 700 bishops and 20,000 pilgrims. The episcopate truly represented the entire Catholic world: 200 Italians, 70 French, 40 Austro-Hungarians, 36 Spanish, 19 Irish, 18 Germans, 12 English, and 19 from other European countries. The East had sent about 50 bishops, the United States 40, Canada 9, Latin America 30, and the mission territories about 100.
The procedure of the Council had been established by the apostolic constitution *Multiplices inter*. Five deputations, each composed of 24 bishops (chosen by secret ballot from among the Council Fathers) and presided over by a cardinal, prepared the drafts and topics to be submitted for the Council’s deliberation, using material elaborated by theologians. The drafts were then distributed to the Fathers some time before the discussion, so that they could propose amendments and necessary modifications. The corrected drafts were returned to the deputations, which, after incorporating the proposed changes, redistributed them to the Fathers. These were then discussed in the general congregations, presided over by five cardinals. Once a draft, after more or less extensive modifications in the subsequent conciliar debates, had received the approval of the majority, it was brought to the public session, which the Pope attended. After the vote of the Fathers (expressed by *placet* or *non placet*), he promulgated the definition. The Council held 1,869 general congregations and 4 public sessions (8 December 1869 [inauguration], 6 January [profession of faith], 24 April [const. *Dei Filius*], 18 July 1870 [const. *Pastor aeternus*]).
---
**The Dogmatic Constitution *Dei Filius*.** — At the first general congregation (10 December 1869), the Fathers were given the draft of the dogmatic constitution entitled *De doctrina catholica contra multiplices errores ex rationalismo derivatos*, Franzelin (v.) SCHRADER, KLEMENS (v.). Though praised for its content and erudition, the draft was criticized for its prolix development, abstract terminology, and harsh style. The president of the dogmatic deputation therefore commissioned Bishops Deschamps, Pie, and Martin to revise the exposition. In particular, Bishop Martin KLEUTGEN, JOSEPH (v.), who by the end of February 1870 presented a draft widely praised by the Fathers for the clarity of its ideas, the harmony of its parts, and the purity of its style. The discussions, which opened in the general congregation of 14 March, led to successive modifications and improvements, culminating in the solemn definition, which was approved unanimously on 24 April. This is the celebrated constitution *De fide catholica*, known as *Dei Filius* from its opening words, which struck at the root of the errors of the modern age (pantheism, materialism, rationalism), opposing them with a dense and luminous exposition of Catholic doctrine on God, revelation, faith, and the relationship between reason and faith.
After a solemn prologue, the first chapter proclaims the existence of a personal God, the free creator of all things, absolutely independent of the material and spiritual world He created (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 sole powers of human reason. This was an explicit condemnation not only of atheism but also of fideism and traditionalism. The same chapter adds that for the other transcendent divine truths, called mysteries (v. MISTERO), supernatural revelation (v.) is necessary and reiterates the teaching of the Council of Trent on its sources: Scripture and Tradition (Denz-U. 1785–88). The third chapter, while asserting the rational character of faith (against the sentimentalism of Protestant tendencies), presents it simultaneously as a free adherence to supernatural truths and a gift of God’s grace (against hermesianism: V. HERMES). It further affirms, in harmony with the thought of Cardinal Dechamps, that the Church, as guardian of the deposit of faith, bears within itself signs of its divine origin (Denz-U. 1789–94). The fourth chapter, after clearly distinguishing between faith and reason, recalls that any apparent opposition between science and religion can only arise from an error in the doctrine of one or a false idea of the conclusions of the other. It adds, against Günther (v.), that while the non-contradiction of properly so-called mysteries can be demonstrated in this life, their intimate content cannot be unveiled (Denz-U. 1795–1800). Following this doctrinal exposition come the dogmatic canons, which condemn opposing errors in the form of anathemas (Denz-U. 1881–20).
---
**IV. THE DEFINITION OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY.** — On 21 January 1870, the Fathers were given a draft constitution *De Ecclesia Christi* in 15 chapters, which made no mention of papal infallibility. On 9 February, the majority requested that this topic be included, especially in view of the heated controversies surrounding it both inside and outside the Council. It was felt that to pass over the doctrine after so much discussion would prejudice its standing before the whole Church. Thus the saying spread: *“quod inopportunum dixerunt, necessarium fecerunt”*, and debates on the subject were expedited, with a new draft prepared (6 March) that dealt solely with *“Le Romano Pontifice eiusque infallibili magisterio”*.
The minority, led by the able and combative figures already mentioned, first protested the change in the program, then mounted a vigorous resistance (letters to the Pope and Cardinal Antonelli, a visit by Bishop Dupanloup to Pius IX to urge him to prevent discussion of the new draft, an international committee to publish articles and pamphlets against infallibility, and appeals to Napoleon III and Minister Ollivier). This resistance was crushed by the determined will of the majority. Thirty-four general congregations were therefore devoted to the topic, during which the minority enjoyed full freedom to express its views. After the pro-infallibility speakers (notably Manning, who appealed to his experience as a convert, and Dechamps, who spoke with the maturity of a seasoned theologian) had set forth their arguments, the minority’s theologians rebutted them point by point, exaggerating historical difficulties and focusing especially on the case of Pope Honorius. The other side responded by weighing the difficulties, examining the relevant texts, discussing the case of Honorius, the reply of Pope Hormisdas, the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Antoninus of Florence, and the scope of the definition of the Council of Florence. The original draft underwent numerous modifications and improvements, culminating in the general congregation of 13 July, when the now definitive formula (masterfully expounded by Bishop Gasser) received 451 *placet*, 88 *non placet*, and 62 *placet iuxta modum*.
In order to secure an increased majority at the public session, the deputation revised the draft in light of the final suggestions but firmly rejected a proposal to insert a phrase indicating the assent of the Church as a condition of the Pope’s infallibility. Instead, to the already clear formula *“ideoque eiusmodi Romani Pontificis definitiones esse ex se irreformabiles”*, the words *“non autem ex consensu Ecclesiae”* were added, thus delivering a mortal blow to Gallicanism. After the definitive text of the draft was approved at the last general congregation (16 July), it was decided that the public session would be held on 18 July. Fifty-five Fathers of the minority, having vainly attempted to obtain from the Pope a postponement of the public session, left Rome after signing a declaration stating that out of veneration and respect for His Holiness they preferred to abstain from the public session rather than pronounce *non placet* in the Pope’s presence.
On 18 July, the solemn proclamation of the dogma took place. All 535 Fathers present (except two, who through a misunderstanding said *non placet*) were unanimous in approving the dogmatic constitution, which Pius IX then ratified with his infallible sanction.
The constitution *Pastor Aeternus* treats, in four concise and clear chapters, of the primacy of jurisdiction of St. Peter over the Apostolic College (Denz.-U., 1821-23), of the perennial transmission of the same prerogative in the person of his successors in the Roman See (ibid., 1824-25), of the intimate nature of the papal primacy as a truly episcopal, ordinary, immediate, and universal power (ibid., 1826-31), and of the personal prerogative of infallibility enjoyed by the Roman Pontiff by a special charism, when, as universal teacher (ex cathedra), he proposes doctrine or resolves questions concerning faith and morals (ibid., 1832-40 [V. INFALLIBILITY; PRIMACY OF ST. PETER AND OF THE ROMAN PONTIFF]).
Once the personal infallibility of the pope is admitted without contestation, all subterfuges for evading obedience to the Church have collapsed; a decision of the Roman Pontiff is now for every faithful a norm to be followed without discussion.
After the Council
The conciliar definitions were received with joy by all the faithful. Even the bishops of the minority submitted to the ordinance. The four cardinals (Rauscher, 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, upon returning to his diocese, announced the definition in a pastoral letter and from Bordeaux sent Pius IX a sincere act of adhesion to the work of the Council. The same Maret openly rejected the errors contained in his book; Gratry, on his deathbed (1871), made a profession of faith in a letter to the Archbishop of Paris, Guibert.In Germany, all the bishops demonstrated their loyalty by publishing the Council’s decrees. Only Döllinger stubbornly refused to submit, despite explicit requests from the Archbishop of Munich and repeated entreaties from friends and admirers; he, however, refused to Catholic Church (v.), REINKE, LAURENTIUS (v.), professor at Breslau, suspended *a divinis* for his bitter polemics against the Council. In France, the notorious apostasy of the Carmelite Loyson (v.) occurred when he joined the Old Catholics. Opposition to the Council’s decrees arose in England from Lord Gladstone; in Austria, which denounced the Concordat with the Holy See; in Bavaria, which protected rebellious priests; in Switzerland, which banished MERMILLOD, GASPARD (v.) and Lachat and 84 parish priests of the Jura.