Photo Credit: © Friedrich Stummel – CC BY 3.0
As soon as they arrived in Rome, the Council Fathers received the schema “De Doctrina Catholica.” This preparatory document dealt with the multiple errors derived from modern rationalism. The general congregations would discuss these issues during the First Vatican Council’s initial work.
This schema had been prepared by Father John Baptist Franzelin, a German Jesuit who served as professor of dogmatic theology at the Roman College. He was one of the nineteenth century’s most outstanding theologians. His great culture and deep knowledge of German philosophy allowed him to accurately assess the dangers of the so-called historical theology, so popular amongst his German compatriots, especially those influenced by Father Ignaz von Döllinger.
Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law
Justly alarmed, Father Franzelin had prepared the schema with admirable technical precision. This quality had both beneficial and harmful repercussions. On one hand, it precluded any doctrinal objection as to its conclusions. That perfection, however, was also detrimental, for it allowed the document’s opponents to claim it was more an academic treatise than a council’s doctrinal exposition. Hoping to avoid the schema’s approval, its enemies exaggerated this aspect.
The first serious incident between the infallibilist majority and the anti-infallibilist minority during these debates on the schema occurred over the words with which the Council’s decrees began. It was the minority’s first explicit protest against proclaiming the dogma of papal infallibility.
The most recent Ecumenical Council had been the Council of Trent. (1545-1563). Its decisions began with the words “Sacrosancta Synodus decernit” (The Holy Synod decides).” However, Father Franzelin’s project opened “Pius, Episcopus, servus servorum Dei, sacro approbante Concilio” (Pius, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred Council).
In the second General Congregation, Bishop Josip Juraj Strossmayer of Đakovo in Croatia rose to combat the schema. He argued that Father Franzelin’s substitution was unwise. “Catholics are used to this formula [of the Council of Trent]; it is engraved in the memories and hearts of all who studied the latest Council, the most familiar to us. Why abandon it? Why replace it with a formula in which the pope comes first and as the principal author of the decrees, especially now that he is not personally presiding over the Council?”
The hall where the first congregations met did not have good acoustics. Nonetheless, Bishop Strossmayer always made himself heard. He was an excellent orator who spoke perfect and elegant Latin with a strong and pleasant voice. His unexpected attack on the Holy Father caught the attention of the whole plenary session, who listened in surprise. Cardinal Antonio Silvera de Luca, the Council’s first president, interrupted him by ringing a bell.
Shy and reserved, Cardinal de Luca did not want to challenge Bishop Strossmayer. Speaking on the Cardinal’s behalf, Anibale Cardinal Capalti, the Prefect of the Congregation for Studies, protested against the bishop’s speech: “In this august temple of Peter, in the presence of his ashes, it is not proper to use language that appears to restrict the rights of the Apostolic See. The proposed title must be kept. It is sacred because of the Roman Pontiff who chose it, and it is sacred under the ancient custom of the Church, from which it was taken.”
Learn All About the Prophecies of Our Lady of Good Success About Our Times
Bishop Strossmayer replied that he had no intention of speaking against the Holy See’s rights. Then, he went on to criticize the schema itself.
The discussion continued until the sixth general congregation. Thirty-five Fathers spoke. Twenty-four of them asked that a commission be established to review Father Franzelin’s work. That proposal was approved. The Most Rev. Victor Deschamps, Bishop of Mechelen, Bishop Louis Pie of Poitiers, and Bishop Konrad Martin of Paderborn1 were placed in charge of the review. This commission actually presented another schema, “De Fide Catholica.” Nonetheless, it still opened with the words “Pius, Episcopus, servus servorum Dei, sacro approbante Concilio.” This phrase was subsequently adopted to begin all decrees of the Vatican Council.
The Secretary of State, Giacomo Cardinal Antonelli, forbade assemblies of bishops from the same nation. They formed small groups that met in the residences of the most prominent members of the majority or the minority. As always, the minority actively campaigned against infallibility. Unwilling to attack the Sovereign Pontiff directly, they accused Louis Veuillot and the Jesuits of heading a movement against their liberal theses. This clique, the liberals charged, were the primary supporters of the proclamation of the dogma of papal infallibility. They knew that the dominant opinion in the Council was unfavorable to them. Therefore, the minority leaders tried to stifle the influence of the Ultramontane journals l’Univers and Civiltà Cattolica.
The first “postulata” (the proposals the bishops made to the Council) revealed the Council fathers’ concerns and the majority’s desire to uphold infallibility. Forty prelates requested that the dogma be declared by a decree in formal terms that excluded all possibility of doubt. They argued that the pontiff’s authority must be declared to be sovereign and, therefore, free from error in matters of faith and morals.
Meanwhile, the bishops received a “postulatum” from the liberals. It advocated: 1) that certain Catholic newspapers be moderated and repressed; 2) to study precautions so the Council would not be disturbed by imprudent and undisciplined newspapers; 3) that no new professions of faith be made, except in cases of absolute necessity.
Such proposals were typical of the progressive minorities. At all councils, liberals constantly request that new professions of faith be formulated only in cases of absolute necessity. This early attempt to avoid condemnation reveals a desire to minimize and avoid doctrinal questions. This strategy facilitates the liberal cause, helping to confuse error with truth.
10 Razones Por las Cuales el “Matrimonio” Homosexual es Dañino y tiene que Ser Desaprobado
Appreciating the true nature of the move, the Council did not even note this part of the “postulatum.” Nor did it pay attention to the request to moderate or repress the conservative Catholic newspapers. If the minority rudely attacked Louis Veuillot, he was the majority’s spokesman to the public, who saw him as a champion of orthodoxy. Throughout the Council, Veuillot was enthusiastically welcomed by the Ultramontane bishops and mercilessly attacked by the liberals. This made him the most talked about and most feared of all laymen in Rome.
Footnotes
- In later years, Bishop Konrad Martin would perform exemplary service for Holy Mother Church during Otto von Bismarck’s anti-Catholic “Kulturkampf.” Bishop Martin’s resistance resulted in several months’ imprisonment before he escaped to the Netherlands. This valiant defender of Papal Infallibility and the rights of the Church died in Belgian exile in 1879.