a "claim which is subversive of the authority of states and governments, and of the whole existing political order," and defining as an article of faith, "the doctrine of the absolute authority of the Popes, as teachers and rulers, both in Church and State."

There are Protestants who maintain, in spite of every argument that can be brought forward in disproof of their allegations, that Catholics pay divine honour to the Mother of God and to the other saints, that forgiveness of sins can be obtained by purchasing an indulgence, that every Catholic priest is a monster of immorality, and every cloister a den of wickedness. In such calumniators alone, deaf to every argument by which their calumnies are refuted, can we find a parallel to those who obstinately defend this Fifth Thesis of Dr. Döllinger.

Dr. Döllinger takes exception also to the third chapter of the Vatican Constitutions, "which ascribes to the Pope the whole plenitude of power-totam plenitudinem potestatis," and from this clause, which when understood of the Church alone-a limitation sufficiently indicated by the whole tenor of the Constitution-is in perfect conformity with the Decrees of former Councils, and with the teaching of Catholic Theology, he infers that "no other position is left to the Bishops than such as would be enjoyed by Papal agents or plenipotentiaries," and that "the episcopacy of the ancient Church, an office of apostolic institution," is thus "reduced to an unsubstantial shadow."

It is in vain that Catholic writers have pointed out that no such inference is warranted, and that this very chapter of the Constitution of the Council expressly declares that the supreme authority of the Pope in no way excludes or supersedes the

1 The Fourth Council of Lateran (A.D. 1215) speaks, in its fifth chapter, of the "principatus ordinariae potestatis super omnes alias ecclesias." The Formulary recited in the Second Council of Lyons (A.D. 1274) contains the phrases summus et plenus primatus et principatus super universam Ecclesiam," and again, “plenitudo potestatis." And it is hardly necessary to quote the well-known words of the Council of Florence (A.D. 1439)—“ primatus in universum orbem," and "plena potestas pascendi, regendi ac gubernandi universalem Ecclesiam."-See SCHULTE. Lehrbuch des Kirchenrechts, p. 192. Ed. 1868.

2 PETRUS BALLERINI. Vindiciae Auctoritatis Pontificiae contra Opus Justini Febronii, cap 3, et seq., p. 165, et seq. Ed. Monaster. 1847. CARD. GERDIL. De Plenitud. Potest. Episcopalis (Opera tom. xi, p. 116, et seq.), and Animadv. in Comment. Febron. Posit. xxv. (Op. tom. xiii., p. 305).

3 The Protestant, Hase, in his Handbuch (p. 187), puts the same idea more pointedly assistants," he says, "or deacons of the Pope." And in the Augsburg Gazette of the 2nd of June. 1870 (Forty-ninth Letter from the Council), we have it thus:"passive, unintelligent promulgators and executors of Papal commands and decrees on faith."

VOL. IX.

17

authority of the Bishops, whom in fact it recognises as the successors of the Apostles, constituted as such by the Holy Ghost, and whose jurisdiction it declares to be ordinary and immediate (ordinaria et immediata), like the jurisdiction of the Supreme Pontiff himself.1

In spite of all this, the calumny is repeated,2 the Bishops are informed, with sarcastic solemnity, that in the impending overthrow of their office by the Papal power, they must find their consolation in the few rays which will be reflected upon them from the throne of Papal Omnipotence; and a sneer is added in reference to the quotation by the Council. of a passage from Saint Gregory the Great, who "repelled the idea of a universal episcopacy with profound and outspoken aversion, as a blasphemous and anti-Christian usurpation." But Saint Gregory, humble as he was, knew thoroughly well that he was invested with authority over all the Bishops of the Church, and whilst, on the one hand, he upheld the dignity of his brethren, on the ground that it could not be compromised without compromising his own, on the other hand, he did not fail to uphold his own dignity, as necessary for the maintenance of theirs.

The theologians most thoroughly imbued with the Roman spirit have always taught, with Saint Bernard, that the Papal dignity, although the highest, is not the only dignity in the Church (summa sed non sola), since the Bishops are invested with authority jure divino, to govern these churches over which they are placed by the ordinance of God; and, consequently, the Pope, although invested with authority over them, to moderate and restrain, within certain limits, the exercise of their authority, cannot exercise his power arbitrarily, but only so far as the good of the Church may require it, nor can he concentrate all ecclesiastical matters in his

1["Tantum autem abest," are the words of the Council, "ut haec Summi Pontificis potestas officiat ordinariae illi episcopalis jurisdictionis potestati, qua Episcopi, qui positi a Spiritu Sancto in Apostolorum locum successerunt, tanquam veri Pastores assignatos sibi greges, singuli singulos, pascunt et regunt, ut eadem a supremo et universali Pastore asseratur, roboretur ac vindicetur, dicente Sancto Gregorio Magno: Meus honor est honor universalis Ecclesiae, Meus honor est fratrum meorum solidus vigor. Tum ego vere honoratus sum, cum singulis quibusque honor debitus non negatur.' ACTA CONCIL. VATICAN. Ecclesia cap. 3.]

Constit. de

2 Dr. Döllinger, after referring to the clause in question, goes on to say:-"The Decree provides that the power of the Bishops is an ordinary' one, that is to say, in the language of the Roman Canonists, a potestas ordinaria subdelegata.” Where did the learned Provost meet with such an expression? By what canonist has it ever been used? All canonists distinguish between the two sorts of jurisdiction with which every Bishop is invested-(1). The "ordinary episcopal jurisdiction;" and (2). That which is communicated to him as a delegate of the Pope. Here, as in so many other portions of Dr. Döllinger's Protest, we trace the pen of the journalist, rather than of the ecclesiastical professor.

own hands, treating all the Bishops of the Church merely as his vicars.1 The Decrees of the Vatican Council are in strict accordance with this teaching; and, whatever assertions to the contrary may be put forward in the columns of the Augsburg Gazette, the Bishops are in exactly the same position now that they occupied before the 18th of July, 1870. To the end of time, the saying of Saint Jerome will retain its truth: "The well-being of the Church depends on the authority of her Supreme Pastor: if he were not invested with an extraordinary and universal jurisdiction there would be in the Church as many sects as there are priests." And hence the Pope has been placed to govern the Church as Pastor, Father, and Head of all.

Towards the close of his protest, Dr. Dollinger writes:-" I would earnestly recommend everyone who wishes to form a just conception of the vast extent of the authority claimed for the Pope in the Decrees of the Vatican Council, carefully to compare the third and fourth chapters; he will then be able to realise what a system of universal government and spiritual dictatorship is there set before us. All Catholics are now commanded to believe, and to make practical recognition of their belief in the existence of a plenary power over the whole Church, as well as over each individual member of it, such as the Popes, since Gregory VII., have claimed for themselves, and such as is set forth in innumerable Bulls since the Unam Sanctam. This power is boundless it is incalculable in its extent it can make itself felt, as Innocent III. proclaimed, wherever sin exists: no

one is

1["Ita ut illius [R. Pontificis] potestas, quamvis summa atque plenissima, non tamen sola sit, sed Episcopos in partem sollicitudinis vocatos debeat agnoscere ; et siquidem possit pro potestatis plenitudine eorum facultates moderari ac limitare quoad exercitium et usum, prout in Ecclesiae bonum expedire judicaverit, non tamen possit omnes eorum facultates ad se attrahere, nec ipsos quasi suos vicarios efficere, neque dioceses omnes quasi unam diocesim habere."-BALLERINI. De Potestate Ecclesiastica Summ. Pontiff. cap. iii., n. 12.

"Nec enim Rom. Pontifex per episcopos veluti per administros aut vicarios suos ecclesiam regit, sed eos constituit tanquam totidem principes ordinaria potestate instructos ad uniuscujusque ecclesiae particularis bonum, quamvis cum debita subjectione in hujus potestatis exercitio a Romana sede."-PERRONE, De Locis Theol. Pars i., n. 618.]

S. HIERON. Dialog. contra Lucifer.

[It is hardly credible that Dr. Döllinger can have regarded this statement as a fair exposition of the Roman doctrine regarding the authority of the Popes. Father Perrone puts the matter very plainly :-"Nullo alio limite voluit Christus primatialem circumscribi dignitatem praeter illum quem praefigeret ejus abusus in destructionem ecclesiae. Nihil enim pontifex potest efficere quod vergeret in ecclesiae destructionem ac si quid ejusmodi moliretur nulli censerentur ejus actus. At in aedificationem omnia potest." De Locis Theol. Pars. i., n. 716].

It is unnecessary to comment upon this gross perversion of truth. Never were the words of John of Salisbury more applicable than at present (Polycrat. Lib. viii., cap. 23):-"Romano Pontifici minimum, eo ipso quod plurimum, licet."

exempt from its jurisdiction: sovereign and arbitrary, it allows no appeal; for according to the declaration of Boniface III., 'the Pope carries all rights in the shrine of his bosom." As he has now become [!] infallible, he can at any moment, by that little word Orbi [that is, by addressing the universal Church], make any proposition, any doctrine, any pretension, an unerring and irrefragable article of faith. In opposition to his pretensions, no right can be maintained, no liberty, personal or corporate, can be asserted, or-to use the phrase of some canonists-the tribunal of God and of the Pope is one and the same. Such a system, bearing as it does, the stamp of its Latin origin, will never make good its footing in Germany."

What then are we to say of the system which is embodied in Dr. Dollinger's Five Theses; does it bear no trace of a Latin origin? Is it the pure creation of the German mind? Or, rather, is it not notorious and unmistakable that the contrary is the fact?

And as the question of nationalities has been raised by Dr. Döllinger, may we not ask whether at such a time as this, when France lies prostrate before her German conquerors, a system French in its conception and in its origin, is likely to make good its footing in Germany? Nor should we lose sight of the fact that not merely the system itself, but also the means employed for giving practical effect to its principles, are, unquestionably, of French origin. They are the same which were employed when the authority of the Holy See was assailed by the Jansenists and their allies of the infidel party, whose combined machinations prepared the way for the great Revolution. No one who examines carefully the internal history of France, from 1682 to 1789, and especially that portion of it which describes the violent opposition offered to the reception of the Bull Unigenitus, can fail to be struck by the parallel between the stormy disturbances of that time, and the agitation at present existing in so many parts, especially of southern Germany.

As to the statement with which Dr. Döllinger concludes his Protest, expressing his conviction "that as one of the results of the doctrine" which he combats “was the downfall of the old German Empire, so, too, if it should be accepted now by German Catholics, it would at once sow the seed of incurable

1 The maxim in reality says that this is what is believed regarding the Pope : censetur habere. It is a maxim borrowed from the old Roman Law; it refers, as Reiffenstuel (Proem in Jus. Canon., sect. xii., p. 213, et seq.) explains, in the first place, to the legislative power of every supreme lawgiver; and, secondly, to the learned councillors and assistants, who are presumed to be the constant attendants of the legislator.

decay in the new Empire which has so lately sprung into existence;" the former portion of the statement thus put forward, is a purely gratuitous assertion which Dr. Döllinger, as he has made it, is undoubtedly called upon to prove, and which has, at least, the appearance of having been dictated by a spirit of partizanship, since so many other causes of the catastrophe to which he refers lie nearer at hand. The verification of the second portion of his statement, dealing exclusively with the future, may possibly be helped out by the misrepresentation of the "New Dogmas," which he has thought fit to set before the public, and by the prejudices which he has been able to excite in the circles to which his influence extends.

W. J. W.

IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL COLLEGES SINCE THE

REFORMATION.

THE IRISH COLLEGE OF DOUAY.

To the as Reverend as Honorablie Descended, Mr. Christopher Cusake, Beginner and President of the Duacian Irish Seminarie; and to all studentes out of his, and all other Seminaries of our Countrie, wheresoever-Grace and Peace.

From about the yeare 1555, as is well known, these late heresies by force, never by voluntarie allowance, oppressed religion in our countrie, banished teachers, extinguished learning, exiled to foreign countries all instruction, and enforced our youth, either at home to be ignorant, or abroad in povertie rather to glean eares of learning, than with leisure, to reap any great abundance thereof. Yet such as travelled to foreign countries, notwithstanding all difficulties, whom their friends in their absence, as is the notorious unkindness in our nation, abandoned, they often attained singular perfection and reputation of learning in sundrie sciences, to principal titles of universities, to high prelacies, of whom some are yet living, some departed in peace. But of those that by their pains advanced the public good of our countrie, as well departed this mortal life, leaving their glorious memory in continual benediction, as yet travailing for it without all private and provincial respects, these to my knowledge were and are the principal: Patrick and Henry Seagrave, Leonard FitzSimon,