RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Vatican Vatican Council
ee ee en ee a or ee re el VATICAN COUNCIL.
I, Antecedent History. Preliminary Canvass and Commit- (§ 3) tees (§ 1).
Prolonged and Resultless Debates New Rules of Procedure (§ 4).
Final Efforts of Minority (§ 4). Vote on Infallibility (§ 5). . Prorogation of the Council.
aS
Reception of Proposal; Topics Sug- Alinement on Infallibility (§ 5). III. Decrees of the Council. gested (§ 2). Minority’s Difficulties; Controver- . Drafts and Motions. Opinions in Religious Quarters (§3). sies Aroused (§ 6). 2. Substance and Import of the Coun- Attitude of the European States Church and State; Infallibility (§ 7). cil’s Resolutions. (§ 4). 2. Third Session, Sunday Apr. 24, 1870. The Decrees (§ 1). . Proceedings of the Council. 3. Fourth Session, Monday July 18, The Pope as Bishop (§ 2).
= —
. From the Opening, until Mar. 6, 1870.
1870.
Rules of Procedure ($ 1). First and Second Sessions (§ 2). I. Antecedent History: The first adducible proof that Pius IX. intended to call an ecumenical councilappeared Dec. 6, 1864, at a session of the cardinals of the Congregation of Rites. He then 1. Prelimi- directed them, and soon extended this nary Can- order to include all the cardinals resivass and dent in Rome, to present their views Committees. on that project, in the form of written opinions; and early in Mar., 1865, a committee of cardinals was appointed to examine these opinions. The majority of the cardinals agreed that a council was necessary, though there was not entire concord as to the matters to be treated. After that, the convening of a council was no longer an open question. So during April and May, and by advice of the college of cardinals, the prefect of the Propaganda, Cardinal Caterini, addressed to thirtysix bishops of various nations a formal request sub arctissima secreti lege, to set forth in explicit terms the matters which seemed to them most worthy of consideration before the council, with regard to their diocesan interests. Pius IX. had himself outlined the list of these confidential advisers; he also made the first public announcement of the prospective council, on June 26, 1867, in his address to such princes of the church as had assembled in Rome for the jubilee festival. The preparation of the council devolved upon an extraordinary congregation of the college of cardinals, briefly known as the ** Central Committee.”’ Its members included Cardinals Patrizi, Reisach, Panebianco, Bizarro, Caterini, and, later, Barnabo, Bilio, Capalli, de Luca. Their preliminary labors in 1865 were occupied with enlisting distinguished theologians and canonists as expert advisers of the council. These invitations were guided by the propositions advanced by the nuncios and by the various bishops. Only the ultramontane trend received such marked preference herein, at the outset, that when the resultant selections became known, they were sharply contested. Besides the central committee there were accessory committees appointed: (1) on dogmaties, (2) on church discipline, (8) on religious orders, (4) on oriental churches and missions, (5) on ecelesiastical polity, and (6) on ceremonies. The labors of these committees were subject to the central committee’s revision. There were ninety-six advisers actively engaged. The question as to who should be invited to the council at large occasioned prolonged inquiries and incidental scruples. Objection was raised against inviting the Roman Catholic princes. The bull #terni patris, subscribed by Pius IX, and the cardinals present in Rome, was
The Program (§ 1). Debate on Infallibility (§ 2). Close of the Contest (§ 3).
Logic of Infallibility (§ 3). The Pope and Councils (§ 4). 3. Adoption of the Resolutions.
IV. Concluding Remarks.
published on June 29, 1868; and convened the council to meet at Rome on Dec. 8, 1869. As the council was to be ecumenical, the bishops of the churches of oriental rites were also invited; and in a subsequent bull, all Protestants and others outside the Roman Catholic pale were summoned, on occasion of the council, to rejoin the Roman Catholic Church. Howbeit, the orientals declined the summons, without exception, and on the Protestant side the invitation was disregarded. The papal invitation found some accordant response within the Anglican church; yet here, too, there was counterbalancing opposition. Thus the Curia’s hope of inducing the schismatic orient and the world of Protestant heresy to some recognition of the Curia’s contemplated measures came to naught.
The reception accorded to the impending council in Roman Catholic circles was not everywhere alike and underwent great fluctuations. Little could be deduced from the terms of convocation respecting the problems to be solved, because the sweeping phraseology embraced the entire sphere of Christendom’s interests. Yet this very latitude allowed the Curia complete freedom of action. Moreover, because no ecumenical council had assembled in the past three centuries, the present design took on the mists and halo of the extraordinary. Features of this kind at once insured popular favor for the plan of a council, and evoked approval on every side. Nevertheless, an increasingly powerful reaction set in among liberal Roman Catholics, when once the illusions began to dissolve which at first had enshrouded the motives for convening the council. What especially illumined the horizon in advance, was a now famous article in the Civilta Cattolica, a review conducted by Jesuits. This article appeared in the form of correspondence by way of France, under date of Feb. 6, 1869, and purported to reflect the views of many Roman Catholics in France that the council would be brief, seeing that its majority stood unanimous. There were named as topics of procedure: confirmation of the Syllabus (q.v.), promulgation of the infallibility of the pope, and dogmatization of the doctrine as to the bodily assumption of Mary. ‘The impression produced by this article was enhanced by the fact that Archbishop Dechamps of Mechlin was warmly praised in a papal brief, dated June 26, 1869, for his pamphlet on L'/nfaillibilité et le concile général (Malines, 1869), wherein he requested that doctrine’s formal definition. Thenceforth the conviction gained wider currency
2. Reception of Proposal ; Topics Suggested.
Vatican Council