passive conception, that is, in that moment when her soul was created by God for the animation of her body. Now original sin must come either from the body, or from the soul, or from both combined. If from the body, then Mary must have inherited it from her parents, since the dogma does not exclude these from sin; if from the soul, then God, who creates the soul, is the author of sin, which is blasphemous; if from both, then we have a combination of both these inextricable difficulties. Nor is the matter materially relieved if we take the superficial semi-Pelagian view of hereditary sin, which makes it a mere privation or defect, namely, the absence of the supernatural endowment of original righteousness and holiness (the similitudo Dei, as distinct from the imago Dei), instead of a positive disorder and sinful disposition. For even in this case the same dilemma returns, that this original defect must have been there from the parents, or must be ordinarily derived from God, as the author of the soul, which alone can be said to possess or to lose righteousness and holiness. Rome must either deny original sin altogether (as Pelagius did), or take the further step of making the Immaculate Conception of Mary a strictly miraculous event, like the conception of Christ by the Holy Ghost, sine virili complexu and sine concupiscentia carnis.

Secondly, the dogma, by exempting Mary from original sin in consequence of the merits of Christ, virtually puts her under the power of sin; for the merits of Christ are only for sinners, and have no bearing upon sinless beings. Perrone, following Bellarmin, virtually concedes this difficulty, and vainly tries to escape it by an unmeaning figure, that Mary was delivered from prison before she was put into it, or that her debt was paid which she never contracted!

Finally, the dogma is inconsistent with the Vatican decree of Papal Infallibility. The hidden fact of Mary's Immaculate Conception must, in the nature of the case, be a matter of divine omniscience and di

1 So the matter is explained by Perrone at the beginning of his Treatise, pp. 1-4; and this accords with the bull of Alexander VII. (in primo instanti creationis atque infusionis in corpus, etc.), see p. 125.

The profounder schoolmen, however, represented by St. Thomas, had a deeper view of original sin, nearer to that of Augustine and the Reformers. The same is true of Möhler, who speaks of a 'deep vuineration of the soul in all its powers,' and a 'perverse tendency of the will,' as a necessary consequence of the Fall.

...'intuitu meritorum Christi .Jesu, Salvatoris humani generis.'

vine revelation, and is so declared in the papal decree.' Now it must have been revealed to the mind of Pius IX., or not. If not, he had no right, in the absence of Scripture proof, and the express dissent of the Fathers and the greatest schoolmen, to declare the Immaculate Conception a divinely revealed fact and doctrine. If it was revealed to him, he had no need of first consulting all the Bishops of the Roman Church, and waiting several years for their opinion on the subject. Or if this consultation was the necessary medium of such revelation, then he is not in himself infallible, and has no authority to define and proclaim any dogma of faith without the advice and consent of the universal Episcopate.

30. THE PAPAL SYLLABUS, A.D. 1864.

Literature.

The Encyclica and Syllabus of Dec. 8, 1864, are published in Pii IX. Epistola encycl., etc., Regensb. 1865; in Officielle Actenstücke zu dem v. Pius IX. nach Rom, berufenen Oekum. Concil, Berlin, 1869, pp. 1–35; Acta et Decreta S. œcum. Conc. Vatic. Frib. 1871, Pt. I. pp. 1-21, etc.

J. Tɔsı (R. C.): Vorlesungen über den Syllabus errorum der pāpstl. Encyclica, Wien, 1865 (251 pp.). J. HERGENRÖTHER (R. C.): Die Irrthümer der Neuzeit gerichtet durch den heil. Stuhl, 1865.

Beleuchtung der päpstlichen Encyclica v. 8 Dec. 1864, und das Verzeichniss der modernen Irrthümer (by a R. C.), Leipz. 1865.

Die Encyclica Papst Pius IX. vom 8 Dec. 1864. Stimmen aus Maria-Laach (R. C.), Freib. 1866-69. (By Riess, Schneemann, and others.)

Der Papst und die modernen Ideen (R. C.), several numbers, Wien, 1865-67. [By CL. SOURADER, a Jesuit.] C. PRONIER (Prof. of the Free Theol. Sem. at Geneva, 1873): La liberté religieuse et le Syllabus, Genève, 1870. W. E. GLADSTONE: The Vatican Decrees: a Political Expostulation, London and New York, 1874; Vatijanism, 1875. Comp. the Roman Catholic Replies of Monsign. CAPEL, J. H. NEWMAN, and Archbishop HANNING in defense of the Vatican Decrees; see below, § 31.

On the 8th of December, 1864, just ten years after the proclamation of the sinlessness of the Virgin Mary, Pope Pius IX. issued an encyclical letter 'Quanta cura,' denouncing certain dangerous heresies and errors of the age, which threatened to undermine the foundations of the Catholic religion and of civil society, and exhorting the Bishops to counteract these errors, and to teach that 'kingdoms rest on the foundation of the Catholic faith;' that it is the chief duty of civil government to protect the Church;' that nothing is more advantageous and glorious for rulers of States than to give free scope to the Catholic Church, and not to allow any encroachment upon her liberty." In the same letter the Pope offers to all the faithful a complete in

1 1...' doctrinam . . . esse a Deo revelatam,' etc.

(

These and similar sentences are inserted from letters of mediaval Popes, who from their theocratic stand-point claimed supreme jurisdiction over the states and princes of Europe. Popes, like the Stuarts and the Bourbons, never forget and never learn any thing.

dulgence for one month during the year 1865,' and expresses, in conclusion, his unbounded confidence in the intercession of the immaculate and most holy Mother of God, who has destroyed all the heresies in the whole world, and who, being seated as queen at the right hand of her only begotten Son, can secure any thing she asks from him.2

To this characteristic Encyclical is added the so-called SYLLABUS, i. e., a catalogue of eighty errors of the age, which had been previously pointed out by Pius IX. in Consistorial Allocutions, Encyclical and other Apostolic Letters, but are here conveniently brought together, and were transmitted by Cardinal Antonelli to all the Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church.

This extraordinary document presents a strange mixture of truth and error. It is a protest against atheism, materialism, and other forms of infidelity which every Christian must abhor; but it is also a declaration of war against modern civilization and the course of history for the last three hundred years. Like the papal bulls against the Jansenists, it is purely negative, but it implies the assertion of doctrines the very opposite to those which are rejected as errors. It expressly condemns religious and civil liberty, the separation of Church and State; and indirectly it asserts the Infallibility of the Pope, the exclusive right of Romanism to recognition by the State, the unlawfulness of all non-Catholic religions, the complete independence of the Roman hierarchy from the civil government (yet without allowing a separation), the power of the Church to coerce and enforce, and its supreme control over public education, science, and literature.

The number of errors was no doubt suggested by the example of Epiphanius, the venerable father of heresy-hunters (d. 403), who, in

1

. . . ‘plenariam indulgentiam ad instar jubilæi concedimus intra unius tantum mensis spatium usque ad totum futurum annum 1865 et non ultra.'

Quo vero facilius Deus Nostris, Vestrisque, et omnium fidelium precibus, votisque annuat, cum omni fiducia deprecatricem apud Eum adhibeamus Immaculatam Sanctissimamque Deiparam Virginem Mariam, quæ cunctas hereses interemit in universo mundo, quæque omnium nostrum amantissima Mater “tota suavis est. . . ac plena misericordiæ . omnibus sese exorabilem, omnibus clementissimam præbet, omnium necessitates amplissimo quodam miseratur affectu" [quoted from St. Bernard], atque utpote Regina adstans a dextris Unigeniti Filii Sui, Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, in vestitu deaurato circumamicta varietate, nihil est quod ab Eo impetrare non valeat. Suffragia quoque petamus Beatissimi Petri Apostolorum Principis, et Coapostoli ejus Pauli, omniumque Sanctorum Cælitum, qui facti jam amici Dei pervenerunt ad cœlestia regna, et coronati possident palmam, ac de sua immortalitate securi, de nostra sunt salute solliciti.'

'A learned Jesuit, Clemens Schrader, translated them into a positive form.

his Panarion, or Medicine-Chest, furnishes antidotes for the poison of no less than eighty heresies (including twenty before Christ), probably with a mystic reference to the octoginta concubina in the Song of Solomon (vi. 8).

The Pope divides the eighty errors of the nineteenth century into ten sections, as follows:

I. PANTHEISM, NATURALISM, and ABSOLUTE RATIONALISM, No. 1–7. Under this head are condemned the following errors:

(1.) The denial of the existence of God.

(2.) The denial of his revelation.

(3 and 4.) The sufficiency of human reason to enlighten and to guide

men.

(5.) Divine revelation is imperfect, and subject to indefinite progress. (6.) The Christian faith contradicts human reason, and is an obstacle to progress.

(7.) The prophecies and miracles of the Bible are poetic fictions, and Jesus himself is a myth.1

II. MODERATE RATIONALISM, No. 8–14.

Among these errors are:

(12.) The decrees of the Roman See hinder the progress of science. (13.) The scholastic method of theology is unsuited to our age.2 (14.) Philosophy must be treated without regard to revelation. III. INDIFFERENTISM, LATITUDINARIANISM, No. 15-18.

(15.) Every man may embrace and profess that religion which commends itself to his reason.3

(16.) Men may be saved under any religion.*

(17.) We may at least be hopeful concerning the eternal salvation of all non-Catholics.5

'Jesus Christus est mythica fictio.' I am not aware that any sane infidel has ever gone so far. Strauss and Renan resolve the miracles of the gospel history into myths or legends, but admit the historical existence and extraordinary character of Jesus, as the greatest religious genius who ever lived.

No. 13. 'Methodus et principia, quibus antiqui Doctores scholastici theologiam excoluerunt, temporum nostrorum necessitatibus scientiarumque progressui minime congruunt.'

3 No. 15. Liberum cuique homini est eam amplecti ac profiteri religionem, quam rationis lumine quis ductus veram putaverit.'

No. 16. ‘Homines in cujusvis religionis cultu viam æternæ salutis reperire æternamque salutem assequi possunt.'

No. 17. Saltem bene sperandum est de æterna illorum omnium salute, qui in vera Christi Ecclesia nequaquam versantur.'

(18.) Protestantism is only a different form of the same Christian religion, in which we may please God as well as in the Catholic Church.1

IV. SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, SECRET SOCIETIES, BIBLE SOCIETIES, CLERICO-LIBERAL SOCIETIES.

Under this head there are no specifications, but the reader is referred to previous Encyclicals of 1848, 1849, 1854, 1863, in which 'ejusmodi pestes sæpe gravissimisque verborum formulis reprobantur.' The Bible Societies, therefore, are put on a par with socialism and communism, as pestilential errors worthy of the severest reprobation!

V. Errors respecting the CHURCH and her RIGHTS.

Twenty errors (19-38), such as these: the Church is subject to the State; the Church has no right to exercise her authority without the leave and assent of the State; the Church has not the power to define dogmatically that the religion of the Catholic Church is the only true religion; Roman Pontiffs and oecumenical Councils have exceeded the limits of their power, usurped the rights of princes, and have erred even in matters of faith and morals; the Church has no power to avail herself of force, or any temporal power, direct or indirect;3 besides the inherent power of the Episcopate, there is another temporal power conceded expressly or tacitly by the civil government, which may be revoked by the same at its pleasure; it does not exclusively belong to the jurisdiction of the Church to direct the teaching of theology; nothing forbids a general council, or the will of the people, to transfer the supreme Pontiff from Rome to some other city; national Churches, independent of the authority of the Roman Pontiff, may be established the Roman Pontiffs have contributed to the Greek schism."

VI. Errors concerning CIVIL SOCIETY, considered as well in itself as in its relations to the Church. Seventeen errors (39-55).

'No. 18. 'Protestantismus non aliud est quam diversa veræ ejusdem christianæ religionis forma, in qua æque ac in Ecclesia catholica Deo placere datum est.'

No. 23. 'Romani pontifices et concilia acumenica a limitibus suæ potestatis recesserunt. jura principum usurparunt, atque etiam in rebus fidei et morum definiendis errarunt.' 'No. 24. 'Ecclesia vis inferendæ potestatem non habet, neque potestatem ullam temporalem directam vel indirectam,'

No. 37. 'Institui possunt nationales Ecclesiæ ab auctoritate Romani Pontificis subducta planeque divisæ,'

No. 38. 'Divisioni ecclesiæ in orientalem atque occidentalem nimia Romanorum Pontificum arbitria contulerunt.'