mh DAILY EVRrviSG TELEGRAPH PHILADELPHIA, THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1871. THE NEW SCHISM DR. DOLLIIR'S DECLMIITIO!!. The Pope Hot Infallibl The Bishop cf Munich's Reply. The following h tfce letter p.ddrcKt'vl by Dr. Dollinger, Dean of the Chapter of Vienna, to the Archbishop of Munich acd Freeing, ia explanation cf his position with reepect to the decree of Papal infallibility: Yonr Excellency has asked me in two l?Hr in frnlain mv ivwtion vith respnet to thi Ilonian decrees of July 18, 1S70, which havo Lecn published by you. It has transpired in tho circlo of your Cathedral Chapter that it is your intention to proceed against me with such penal inonsnroj as are used only against such priests ft3 have been guilty of gross moral crimes, and even but seldom against these. This is to occur if I do not, within a certain period, submit my self to tho two now articles of faith, as to the universal Allgcirall) power and infallibility cf the Tope. I learn at tho same timo that a council meeting of the German bishops is to take place shortly at Fulda. In the year 1848, when a meeting of all the German bishops was held at Wurzburg, the honor of an invitation was extended to my self, and I took part in the proceedings. Your Excellency might perhaps arrange thit I might be allowed in the meeting which is about to take place, not this time to take part in the proceedings, but to have an audience for a few hours. For I am prepared to prove before thi-3 meeting the following theses, which are of decisive importance for the present situation of the German Church, as well as for my per sonal position: First. The new Articles of Faith nro baaod upon the text in tho Iloly Scriptures, St. Matthew xvi, 18, and St. John xxi, 17, and as far as infallibility is concerned, upon the text St. Luke xxii, 32, with which the same, bibli cally considered, must stand or fall. But we are bound by a solemn oath, which I myself have twico sworn, to accept and to explaia the Iloly Scriptures not otherwise than ac cording to the unanimous consent of tha fathers. Tho fathers of the Church have (ill, Without exception, explained tho texts ia question- as bearing a totally different mean ing to the new decrees, and especially in the text St. Luke xxii, V2, have found anything but an infallibility given to the Pope. There fore, were I to accept with the decrees thii explanation, without which every biblical basis to the same is wanting, I should com mit a perjury. And, as I have said, I am preparod to prove this to the bishops in council. Second. In several episcopal pastorals and notices which have lately appeared, tho asser tion has been made, or the historical proof sought, that the new doctrine now proceeding from Home as to tho universal power of the Pope over every single Christian, and as to the Papal infallibility in decisions in the Church on matters of faith from the begin ning, through all time and forever, Has been generally, or at least nearly generally, be lieved and taught. I am ready to prove that this assertion is based upon an entire miscon ception of the traditions of tho Church for the first thousand years, and upon an entire distortion of her history. It is in direct con tradiction to the plainest facts and testimo nies. Third. I am ready to prove that the bishops of the Latin countries, Spain, Italy, South America, France, who formed the immense majority at Home, were, with their clergy, already led astray by the classbooks from which they took their ideas during their semi nary education; since tho proofs given in these books are for the most part false, in vented, or distorted. I shall prove this, first, with the two principal end favorite works of modern theological schools and seminaries, "The Moral Philosophy of S. Alphonsus Liguori" (And especially as regards the treatise contained therein concerning the Pope), and with "The Theology of the Jesuit Peroni;" further, with the writings of the Arohbishop of Cardoni sad of Bishop Ghilardi, which were distributed in Iiomo during the Council; and, finally, with "The Theology of the Vienesse Theologian Schwetz. " Fourth. I appeal to the fact, which I am ready to prove in public, that two Ueneral Councils and 6evertl Popes havo already de cided in the fifteenth century, by solemn de crees, issued by the Councils, repeatedly con firmed by the Popes, the question as to the extant of the Pope's power, and as t his in fallibility, and that the deorees of the 18th of July, 1870, are in the most glaring contradic tion to these resolutions, and, therefore, can not possibly be considered as binding. Fifth. I believe that I shall be able to prove that the new decrees are simply incompatible with the oonstitnti ons of the States of Eu rope, and especially with that of Bavaria; and that I find it impossible for me, who am bound by oath to this constitution, which I have lately swurn on my admission to the Chamber of the Councillors of State, to ac cept the new deorees, and, as their necessary consequence, the Bulls "Ucamand Sanctam" and "Cum ex Apostolatus Officio," tho Sylla bus of Pius IX, with bo many other Papal declarations and laws, which are new to be accepted as infallible decisions and are in irreconcilable antagonism to the laws of the country. I appeal on this subject to tho opinion given by the legal faculty ia Munich, and am ready to abide by the arbitration of any German legal faculty which your Excel lency may be pleased to name. JjJI only ask two conditions for the confer ence which I have proposed, or rather prayod for the first, that my assertions, together with any counter assertions, shall be recorded, with a view to their subsequent publication; the second, that a man of soientifio culture, to be chosen by me, shall be allowed to bo present at the conference. Should this be unattainable before the Gor man bishops in Fulda, I venture most re spectfully to proffer another request, that it xuay please your Excellency to form out of the members of your Cathedral Chapter a committee, before which I may plead my cause in the way above mentioned. Sever! of these venerable gentlemen are doctor, and were formerly professors of theology and at the same time my former scholars. I may hope that it would be more agreeable to them to treat with me in quiet argument, to con fute me, if possible, with reasons and facts, than to draw up, upon the seat of judgment, criminal sentence against me, and to submit the same to your Excellency to be fulminated, as the saying is. If your Excellency will consent to preside at this conference, and will condopcend to correct any errors iuto which I may have fallen In tho citation and oxpl mutton of testimonies and facts, I i-hull count it as a groat honor, and the cause of truth can only profit theroby. And when you place b- foro iue the prospsjt of tho exorcise of jour pastoral po-ver, I uny still hope tht you will prefer to employ iu the find, ph'co toward me tho finost, mot noble, nio'.t benevolext, r.nd mo-it Christlik'j attribute in this po wit namely, to teacher' office. Should I bo convinoed by testimo nials ai.d f; o!s, I tsii;;f.f) myself to revoke publicly all tbat I Lave written in this matter and to confute- n.yfflf. In n-iy ca;;3 the re sults must bo a Wni tngo-.i'? to tho Church r.nd tho penoo of spirit. V jr itH n it iuys?lf nlono who nni Aotiwrue-1; tho;nan.u of the clergy, hundreds of thousands of the laity think D3 I do, cad if, iaipossiiblo t3 ai ccpt tho now i rtidos of faith. I'p to this day not a single one, oven of thoo vlio have signed ft declaration cf sub mission, has said to mo that ho is really cou vinced of tao truth of thoso theses. All my frioiuls and asquwitaucrs confirm me in thiw experience; "not a bingle porsou believes ia it,'' is what I hear day by day fro;ii all lipi. A coul' reneo such as I havo prop -)ad, find the publication of the proco'idins, will in any cfiso afford that doepijr iusight which so many long for. Perhaps jour Excellency wiil refer me to tho Pastoral issued recently by yoursolf, as a source from which Ian elraw sufficient in struction and correction of my opinions; but I must confe w that it has had exactly ihe opposite efi'eot upon me, aud I am ready to prove that there is there a long list of misun derstood, distorted, mutilated, aud invented testimonieM, which, taken together with the suppression of the most important facts and counterproofs, form a mott unreal picture of the true tradition. It is certain that the per son to whom your Excellency intrusted this task elid not invent lheo falsifications, but has borrowed them in good faith from others (Cardoni, for instance), but were it bis desire to defend his work at tho proposed conference, he would find me ready to prove my assertion in a few hours, or, should I not succeed in doing so, to make public apology to him. I would only ask for ono condition in consideration of the import once of the matter, viz., that the Government be requested to allow a statesman, learned iu historical and ecclesiastical matters, to attend tho conference As the case is one of thi highest importance for all governments, it may bo assumed that this requobt would not be ref ased. There u no want of precedents in the past history of tho Church whicu show that my proposal is in accorduuee with tha principles as well as with the praotico of the Church. In the year 411, a conference of 280 Catholic and 27i Bonatist bishops held throo sessions under the presidency of the imperial officer of State, Msrcidlinus, r.nd tiki disputed doc trine was discussed, upm which the latter decided in favor of the Catholic bishops. In the year 1 13;5, Bohemian Culiilines appeared at the Council of Basel, and a dacioe which Lad been issued eighteen years before by tho Synod of Coustauce, as to the Communion in ono kind, 7as now submitted to new dis cussion and examination, tho result being that compromise (also acknowledged by the Pupal chair) which wa? a most important aud fundamental concessioa to the Bohemians, and one differing widely from the older decree. A still great sitnilurity with the transaction proposed by myself is to be found in tho conference, so celebrated ia ron, of Evreux, end the Protestant Btalosuiau and savant, Du Pletsis-Mornay, which took place in the year 1000, at Fontainebleau, under the auspices of King Henry IV. Hero it was a question as to the proof that Moruay had fa&ilied or incorrectly quoted a consid erable number of authorities in his book upon the Er.chn.rist. Henry himself presided, end tho most eminent mon of both Churches w ere present as witnesses. The conference was interrupted after a few days, and after a number of Moruay'a quotations had bten ex amined, by the illness of the latter, but caused, nevertheless, a remarkably favorable effect for tho Catholio causo in the excited minds of that period. Most venerable Arohbishop, I loave en tirely to your own judgment which form you will give to a conference eo much desired by myself, and certninly so welcome to multi tudes of German Catholics, and what persons you will invite to attend or oppose to me; in your diocese there is certainly no want of professional theologians who will be glal to accept your invitation. The praotico of the Church proves that a question of faith is jtiot as much an affair of th9 laity as of the clergy, and that the former may take part in the scientific examination and establishment of tho tradition a fact which both Popas and theologians have acknowledged. And in this case, which is a matter for historical proof, I am gladly ready to submit to the verdict of the most eminent historiaus of the German nation and of the Catholic faith. Such men as Ficker, lleumont, Holier, Ar neth, Kampschulte, Cornelius, Lorenz, We gele, AscLbach, may judge whether my proofs bo critically and historically right or not. Your Excellency was pleased formerly to honor my book on the "First Agos of the Church Apohtolical'' with your approval, and it was generally considered among German Catholics to be a true picture of the time of foundation. Even the Jesuitic-Ultrajuontaue party let it pass without censure. But if the new decrees contain the truth, then I have laid myself open to the reproach of Laving entirely misrepresented the history of the Apostles. That entire section of my book w hich concerns the constitution of tho earlier Church, my description of the relation in which Paul and the other Apostles stool to Peter all is fundamentally wrong, and I ought to condemn my on book, aud ojafoss that I bavu neither understood Luke's acts of the Apostles nor their own Epistles. The new doctrine of the Vatioja invests the Pope with entire plenary power (tvtam jihnitudinan fttesta tin) over the whole Church, as well as over every sinjjlu Uymta, prit6t, or lifchop; a power which is to ropre Eent at the same lime the truly episcopal, and again the specifically Papd power which is to include in itself everything con cerning faith, morals, duty, discipline, which shall reach every ono from the monarch to the dny laborer, and can punish, com. and, and foibid him. The wordiDg is so cirefully arranged that no other position and authority remains for tie bishops than that of Pual cemmiuearies or delegates. Aai ia this mia ner, as cvcy one acquainted with Church bi'-tory und with the fntliers wiil c-mfu-w, the epihoupscy of tho e-arly Chnroh is cssia tia'Jy dissolved rnd aa apostolical institution to which, according to the jcidgrneut of th fLthere, the highest importance and autho rity in Ihe Church is due, is subtilized to a bodileba shadow. For no one will think it possible that there should exist two bishops in the same diocese, ono of whom is at the same time Pope, the other LtiDa simply a bishop and a Papal vicar or dioccsnn eoiami-;sary is not a bishop, is no successor of the apoRtlei; he may, through tho powers conceded to him from Home, be very mighty so long as his principal allocs Lim to rulf, just iu tho same way as a Jesuit or mcndt:ant friar to whom the Top-J Las granted hbuudanco of privileges also poi-sef-ses great power; aud I well know that such an extension of their powers has been hold out iu propped to tha bishops in Home; that they bavu been told, "The moro irresistible tbo Tope tho btrongor shall yo be, foj the rays of tbo abundance of his power shall fall also on ycu. mo ou-ivps ot lue miuority nave penetrated delusion ot Ui(so promise.',; t bey auti ers'jo l c:arly, ai tc3 "Analytical ' show, that as rooo as tho uni versal ii.v 'oncy of the Pope should bo rstablhl.ed they blight indeed continue to be dignitaries of the Church, but no longer true binhops. You yourself, venerable sir, lock part in tho deputa'ion which made such nrgeM courier representations to tae 1 ope em the l.'th of July, 1870 representation which Eisl'oo von Kotteler (Mayoncc) sought to emphasizf by prostration! We kuow th it those representations wero fruitless. The sole convolution Liven to the bishops' mourn ing the Ioks of their ecclesiastical dignity was confined to tho declaration in tho decree that tho Episcopal power is an ''ordinary" one (i. ( , mpotctitax ordi'naria subddcgtla, as tho lioiui.-h canonists are accustomed to ex press it), and that tho Popo considers it to ba Lis duty to support them, this being vouched by a mutilated saying of Gregory tho Great, by a passage which, if it, with others, had been quoted in its entirety, would indeed have proved to the world that this Popo of tho seventh century put away from hiuislf with tho deepest horror euedi a universal Epis copacy ps has now boon established, consider ing it a blasphemous usurpation. Nor has there been any lack of prayers, representations, and warnings beforo and during tho Council. You yourself, vanerablo sir, took part in the same by your signature, The bishops cf tho minority havo doclared in an addroKO to the Popo, on the 12th of Janu ary, sb'tied by yourself, that "the declarations r.nd acts of the Fathers of the Church, the true documents of history, the Catholic educa tional pystem itself, presented the most seriouu difficulties in opposition to tho procla mation cf the doctrine of infallibility." They were, as they themselves SRid, afraid even to discuss tbv;o diilioulties, and prayod tho Pope to relieve them from tho necessity of such a discussion i. ., to rclinquisnhisiufullibiiity But when the I'ope insisted that tho Council should occupy itself therewith, the German bishops demanded on tho 11th of March ex haustive conferences on the question of in fallibility, to bo conducted by deputations chosen from both sides. These wero not granted, and they had to content themselves with speeches in the Aula, where any regular discussion was au impossibility, As to the indispensability and urgent need of eu?h conferences I would only quote hero one instance. A considerable number of Italian bishops demanded in a since-printed address that Penal infallibility should bo raised to a dogma of faith, becauso two men, both Italians and both the pride of their ration Thomas Aquinas and Alphousus Liguori, these shining lights of the Church has thus taught. Now, it was well known and proved by me, as well as by Gratry, that Thomas had been deceived by a long series of invented testimonies, as, indeed, he bases his teaching in this instance almost exolusively upon such falsificatioHS and never upon genuine passages of the 1 athors or CounaiU. writings ia sufficient to convince any practised thoologiau that his deal lngs witn ttismeu passages are sua worso than those of Thomas. My exposure of the fraud to which the latter had succumbed had created great sensation in ltomo. T ne author of a pamphlet published there, aud directed ogainst myself, Fays that a great cry had been raised on the subject round about him. It ought, therefore, to have been indispensably necessary to examine closely into tho mttar It is true that such an examination, carefully and thoroughly begun, would have led very far; it would havo resulted iu the proof that the theory of Papal infallibility Lad been in troduced into the Church solely by a series of calculated inventions aud falsifications, and had then been spread and maintained by force, by the suppression of other teaching and by tho many means and artifices wkich are at the disposal of tho ruling power. All exertions, representations, and peti tions, theu, were truitless; nothing was con ceded, and yet tho example of the so-often quoteel Council of Florence was before their eyes, when the assertion of the Greeks, that falsified passages of the 1 ethers wore laid be fore them, led to examinations and discus sions lasting many months and carried on with the grcatct care. It is assuredly known to your Excellenoy that the most careful and ripe consideration of tradi tion has invariably been required of any true (Ecumenical Council about to issue dogoiatio resolutions. How great the contrast in this respect between Trent and that which o curred in Home in 1-701 Certainly the treatise of Archbishop Cardoni, which was accepted at once by the preparatory committee, and which was to do considered by the assembled bishop.) as a proof, could not have supported examination lor ouc single hot'.r. In tho whole history of the Church I only know of one General Council in which, as iu this last, those in power prevented any thorough discussion of the tradition, and this was the Second of Epheius, in the year 4i;; these, in the so-called Synod of Thieves (liaubersynode), this was done by force and by tumultuous tyranny. In the Vatican Council the order of proceeding imposed on the assembly, tho Papal Committee, aud the will of the majority, sufferod no regular aid critical examination to be made. Such an examination would assuredly have brought to light many awkward and unpleasant matters, but it w ould have preserved the Church from a state of confusion which must appear pitia ble to yourself. If you notwithstanding assert that the Vatican assembly was entirely freej you take the word "free" in a sense which theological circles do not generally attach to it. A council is only then theologically freo when free examination and discussion of all objections and difficulties has taken place, when exceptions have been admitted arid examine! ia accordance with the rulos for ascertaining the tradition. That not even the most modust beginning was made in this direction that, indeed, the immense majority of the bishops from Latin countries wanted either the will or the power to distin guish truth from falsehood, right from wrong, is proved by the pmp hlets which appeared in Italy and were distributed in Koine for instncee, those f,t tho Dominican Bishop of Mondori, Ghilardi; and further, by the fajt that hundreds of these Lihops could without blushing rest their case upon the unassailable authority of Alphonsus Liguori. It is well known that the Jesuits, when they had conceived the plan of establishing Papal absolutism in Church and btate, in eduoation and administration, as a dogma, invented the so-called "Sacriacio deU'inttsllctto," and as- nured their cdhercnts and disciples yes, even persuaded many, and among them many Mshops that tho most benutitul act of adora tion of tho Almighty and the most noble Christian heroism consist in this that man, renouncing his own spiritual light of self- gamed nnderstandinq and diHcoinmunt,shoul 1 throw himself with bliud faith into tho arms of our unerring Topsl magistracy, as the sole sure source of religions knowledge. And this re- ligiouB order has indeed had preat .success in raising in the eyes of numbers intellectual indolenco to the dignity of a religious sacri fice full of merit, aud has even moved men, whoso culture would Lave enabled them to enter vpon a historical examination, to abandon the same. But as far as we miy judge from their pastorals the German t lhhops have not yet descended to this point of delusion. They still concede- to human knowledge,to human search and examination, a noht to exist aud a sphere of activity. They themselves appeal to history, as does the pastoral which has appeared uudor your nnme. Iu a pastoral letter which has just been sent to me Bishop Lot bar von Kubed in Frei burg says, on pno ! "J 'era the Pope receive cow revelations? Cuii ho create nev articles of faith? Certainly not. lie can only de clare that a doctrine is contained in the Holy Scriptures and in tradition; therefore, is ro- vcaltd by God, and must bo believed of all. I do not eloilbt that yonr Excelloncy and all other German bishops are fully agreed with these words. But the question is, then, in the present confused state of the Church sin ply a historical one, which is to bo treated anel decided upon according to tho means iu our power, and to tho rules which are appli cable to every historic search, to even-dis covery of past facts that is to say, of such as belong to history. There are in this case no special or fcecret sources of which the Popes alone havo the right or power to avail them selves. Both Pope and bishops iuustin tbiscuse necessanlj-, if I may use the expression, place themselves under the common law l. e., if their resolutions are to endure they must adopt'that course; must initiate that exami nation of witnesses with the requisite sifting and critical proof of evidence which alone, in the judgment of all men of capacity in historical matters, is able to give ns truth and certainty. There were, therefore, and remain yet, two questions to bo answered in accordance with this course. Firstly, is it the truth that tho three sayings of Christ respecting Peter were understood from tho beginning through all centuries in the whole Church in tho seueo which is now given to them Lamely, that of an infallibility and boundless universal power granted thereby to the Topes ? Secondly, is it true that the ecclesiastical tradition of all men in the writ ings of the fathers and the facts of history prove tho general acknowledgment of this double right of the Pope ? If theso questions must bo answered in tho neg!ive it is not permissible to appeal, as Bishop von Kubel and others do, to the assist ance of the Holy Ghost, as promised to tho Pope, and to the obedience of faith due on this account to him; for what we are to ex amine into historically is just whether this assistance has been promised to him. And where has this boen done? Not in the Coun cil, for there, as Cardoni's principal treatise proves, even falsifications were not shunned, and an entirely unreal picture of tradition has been given and a suppression of the most striking facts and counter testimonies. And it is precisely this which 1 am ready to prove. And here I beg your Excellency to considar luat mo Uoctrlno wmuU wo Mrs now to atlopi lorms Dy its own nature, and by the decU ration of the Pope himself, by the confession of all infalhbilists, a fundamental article of faith that it is a eiuestion of the reqnez fl.lei, of the rule which must decide what is to be believed and what is not. In future evory Catholic Christian could only answer the query why he believes this or that as follows "I believe or deny it because the infallible Popo has commanded mo to believo or to deny it." Nor can this first principle of faith, as the Holy Scriptures necessarily snouid most clearly show, ever hare boen doubtful in the Church it must at every date and among every people have governed the whole Church like a brightly shining star must have been placed in the front of ail in struction; and we all wait for an explanation how it is to be cleared up that only after lo;w years the Uhurch tas started the idea of making an article of faith of a doctrine which the Pope calls, in a letter addressed to your Excellency on the 23th of October, "ipsum fundament ale principium Catholici.o fidei ao doctrinio." How can it have been possible that the Popes should have, durin centuries past, exempted whole oountries, whole schools of theology, from belief in this "fundamental article of faith? And, may I add, how is it that your Excellency yourself strove so long and so persistently against the enunciation of this dogma ? Because it was not opportune, yon say. Bat can it ever have been "inopportune" to give to believers the key of the whole temple of faith, to anuouueo to them the fundamental article on which all the rest depend? "We stand all of ns gidly before a chasm which opened before us on tho ISth cf July last. lie who wishes to measure the immense range of these resolutions may bo urgently recommended t compare thoroughly ths third chapter of the deorees in Couuoil with the fourth, and to realize for himself what a fijste m of universal government and spiritual dictation stands hero before ns. It is the plenary power over the whole Church as over each separate member, such as the Popes have claimed tor themselves since Gregory 11, such as is pronounced in the numerous bulls since the bull "Unam sanotam," which is from henceforth to be believed and acknow ledged in his life by every Catholio. If his power is boun'ciless, incalculable, it can, as Incoaent III said, strike at sin everywhere; can punish every man, allows of no appeal, is sovereign and arbitrary, for, accordin,' to Bonifacius VIII, the Pope "carries all rights in the shrine of his bosom." As he has now become infallible be can in one moaieut, with one little word "orbi" (that is, that he addresses himse-lf to the whole Church), make every thebis, every elootrine, every demaud an unerring and irrefragible article of faith. Against him there can be maintained no right, no personal or corporate freedom; or, as" the canonists 6ay, the tribunal of Goi aud that of the Pope are one and the same. This Bjstem bears its Itomish origiu on its fore head, and will never be able to penetrate in Germanic countries. As a Christian, as a theologian, as a historian, as a citizen, I cannot accept this doctrine. Not as a Chris tian; for it is irreconcilable with the Bpirit of the Gospel and with tha plain words of Christ and of the Apostles; it purposes just that establishment of the kingdom of this world which Christ rejected; it olaiuas that rnle over all communions which Peter forbids to all and to himself. Not as a theologian; for tha whole tradition of the Church ia iu ii reconcilable opposition to it. Not as a his torian can I accept it; for as such I know that the persistent endeavor to realize this theory of a kingdom of the world has cost Europe rivers of blood, hos confounded and degraded whole countries, has shaken the beautiful organio architecture of the elder Church, and has begotten, fed, and sustained the worst abuses in the Church. Finolij-, as a citizen, I must put it away from me, because by the claims on the sub mission of States and monarchs, and of the whole political order under the Tapal power, and by tho exceptional position which it claims for the clergy, it lays the foundation of endless, ruinous dispute between Stat and Church, between clergy and laity. For I cannot conceal from myself that this doc trine, the results of which were tho ruin of tho old German kingdom, would, if govern ing the Catholic part of the German nation, at emce lay the seed of incurable decay in the n?w kingdom which has just been built up. Accept, etc., I. yon Dollinger. Munich, March 28, 1871. Fodtornl Letter of the Are liMthop of Mn nlrli to Ills Arc lull m-exc Iu Antwcr to Dr. Poll Intel's Dcclnrntlon Agnlunt the Iiimllll.llllj- of the Poic-I)r. Dnlllur F luc id AVKlioiit llic l'ule of the CUuri li. Tho following letter has been addressed by the Archbishop of Munich to the priests and Cock of Lis diocese: Gregorius, by tho graco of God and tho Holy Apobtoiio See, Aichbishop of Munich, Prelate of the Household and Councillor to His Holiness, tto , to tho venerablo clergy and archdiocese, salvation and blessing in the Lord: Dr. von Dollinger, Dean of tho Chapter and Professor of Theology, addressed to us, on Mnrch 20, a declaration stating his posi tion to the (Ecumenical Council and its reso lutions, which he, at the same time, handed to the Ang9burg Augcmeine Ztxtung for pub lication. It was pecordingly published in tho extra supplement of said paper of March 31. ILis open declaration compels ns, the vener able clergy and the faithful of our arch diocese, to publicly and emphatically draw attention to tho principal errors containod in this deplorable document and to place its author without the pale cf the lloman Catholic Church, in case he should persist in those heresies, ihe author demands. First. That he should be permitted to prove in an assembly of bishops and theolo- gists that the decrees of faith of tho fourth sitting of the (Ecumenical Council were neither contained in the Holy Scriptures, as understood by the fathers of the Church, nor in the writings handed down according to their true history; that the latter have, in fact, been falsified by forged or mutilatod documents, and that these same documents are in flagrant contradiction with tho more ancient ecclesiastical decision. But the author has overlooked that there is no question be fore ns which is yet to be decided, and therefore carefully to be examined. Tho eiuestion has already boen decided. A General Council, legally convened, volun tarily assembled and directed by tho Head of the Church, has, alter caretui examination, explained, formulated, and defined this arti cle of faith. Every Catholio Christian knows at present what the Church prescribes to bo lieve. The Church which Jesus Christ has promised to the end of the world cannot bid ns believe anything else than the revelation of God Himself. Whoever, therefore, op poses the declaration of the Church opposes God. "He who will not hear the Church let him be unto thee as a heathen and a publi can. Matthew xvin, 17. Second. The author asserts that a purely historical question was here only in the case, -wkioU ouuld solely t ronoWed by tho rnung means and rules as apply to the research of any other historical fact. By this means the Church is placed under historic examina tion. The decisions of the Church are sub mitted to the judgment of the last historical wnter.her divinely ordained office to instruct is set abide and all the Catholio truths placed nnder controversy. Let science take np the Catholio teachings of faith and examine them by all human means, and they will stand proof against all contradiction. Let the soienoe of infidelity revolt against Goi and His revela tion, ogainst tho Church and her decrees of faith, it will never be able to shake the rock upon which the Lord has built His Church. Third. The author declares that the de crees of July 18, 1870, are in contradiction with the Constitutions of European States, but particularly w ith that of Bavaria; that this article of belief has wrought the ruin of the old German Empire, and would, if pre vailing vith the Komun Catholio portion of the German nation, plant the germs of a lingering and inourable malady into the Con stitution of the new German Empire. Against this entirely erroneous theory and hateful accusation we protest with a loud voice aud declare it an unfounded charge against the Catholic Church, her Head, her Bishops, and all her members, who will never cease "to render nnto Cresar the things that are Cicsar's, and nnto God the things that are God's." Dearest members of the diocece, the views ard judgments alleged in this document, of which we have enly pointed out to you the most notable ones, have since the convoca tion of the (Ecumenical Council been circu lated in many books and newspapers; it must be confessed with sorrow that this dooament has given the highest probability to the long cntertajced sad supposition that the author of this declaration is the spiritual head of the wholo movement against the GSouruenical Council which has caused so much confusion in the minds and consciences of Christians. The equally numerous writings disproving this heresy found, bias! no ear with those cir cles hostile to the Church. Now, however, the open opposition of a man, who has hith erto deservedly filled high positious in tho Church and State, has given the matter the aspect of a formal revolt against the Catholio Church. Dear brethren, we are well conscious of our duties as chief pastor of the diocese, and have, therefore, not delayed in addressing to yon these grave and warning pastoral words, and in takirig the now neoessary measures. The further steps which we shall be obliged to take will be in no less degree governed by a single view of the dangers threatening tee Church in Gormauy aud love for the erring brother. "We shall not break the bruised reed or quench the smoking flax." Matthew xii, 20. Wo shall, however, know how to protect our dear flock from error anJ teioptatioa. To the venerable priests of our archdiooese we exclaim, with Panl, "Oh, Timothy, keep that w hich is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings and oppositions of science falsely bo called." Timothy xviii, 20, 21. Pray, however, my dearest brethren, for the salvation of the author, jeopardized by that unfortunate declaration; pray for the holy Church, partioidfitly in our dear German and Bavarian Futt erlaud; pray for your sor rowful pastor, who blesses you iu the nama of the Father, the fcon, aud the Holy Ghost. Amen. The present pastoral letter is to be com municated from tho pulpit aooording to the wants of the faithful. tQaEoouics, Archbishop of Munioh. Munich, Easter Sunday ot the year 1871. OITY ORDINANCES. "p ESOLUTION To Lay Water-pipe on Celeste, Amelia. and other Hrects. Resolved, Itv the Select and Common Coun cils tf the City of Philadelphia. That tho Chief Encincer of the Water Department be and is hereby authorized to lay water-pipe on the following tureeu: Celeste and Amelia streets, from Seventh to Elchth street. Bixth street, from Mifflin to McKeao Ptrcet. p Seventh street, from Moore to McKoan street. And Mifflin, Amelia, Hodman, and Dudley flreetp, from Sixth to Seventh etrect, In tha First waid. June street, from Seventh to Eighth street, in the Fourth ward. Terrace street, from Grape to Mechanic street. (irnpo street, from Wood to Eclair street. 1 Fleruinfr. and ISclair streets, from Grape to Cotton street, In the Twenty-first ward. Union street, from Uaverford avenue to Aspen street. Afpen and Atlantic streets, from Thirty-fifth to Thirty-sixth 6ircet, iu tho Twenty-fourth ward. Chadwlck red Seventeenth st eets, from Reed to Dickerson street: and Dlekcrron street, from Bancroft to Seventeenth street, in the Twenty sixth ward. Carlisle street, from Monument Cemetery to Siisqut hanna avenue. Norris stieet, from Carlisle to Broad street. On Broad street, from Westmoreland street to Tioga street, in the Twenty-eighth ward. And Harvard street, between Oxford and Jefferson streets, in the Tvveuty-ninth waid. HENRY HUIIN, Fresldcnt of Coinmou Council. Attest llOHERT BETIIIZLL, Assistant Clerk of Select Council. SAMUEL W. CATTEhL, President of Select Council. Approved this twenty-fifth day of April, Anno Domini one thousand eight huudred and seventy-one (A. D. 1S71). DANIEL M. FOX, 4 27 It Mayor of Philadelphia. AN ORDINANCE To Maker an Appropriation to Pay a Bill for Advertising In 1S70. Section 1. The Select and Common Councils of the City of Philadelphia do ordain, That the sum of three hundred and twelve dollars and sixty cents he aud the same is hereby appro priated out of item 5 of the appropriation to the Clerks of Couucils for 1871, approved December 31, 1870, to pay a bill for adver tising ordinances, etc., in "The Press" in the year 1S70. nENRY IIUHN, President of Common Council. Attest Benjamin II. Haikes, Clerk of Select Council. SAMUEL W. CAT TELL, President of Select Council. Approved this twenty-fifth day of April, Anno Domini one thousand eight hundred and seventy-one (A. D. 1871). DANIEL M. FOX. 4 27 It Mayor of Philadelphia. RESOLUTION Of Instruction to tho City Solicitor. Resolved, By tho Select and Common Councils of the City of Philadelphia, That the City Solicitor be and he is hereby authorized aud instructed to take all necessary proceedings to stop the erection of telegraph poles on Fifteenth street, between Chesnut and Market streets, or other streets; and also to cause the immediate removal of all those lately erected on that part of Fifteenth street. HENRY IIUITN, President of Common Council. Attest Robert Bkthell, Assistant Clerk of Select Council. SAMUEL W. CATTELL, President of Select Council. Approved this twenty-fifth day of April, Anno Domini one thousand eight hundred and seventy-one (A. D. 1871). DANIEL M. FOX, 4 27 It Mayor of Ph Uadelphia. LEGAL NOTICES. IN THE ORrHANSOOURT FOll TUB CITY AND COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA. Estate of CHK1STINE B1DDLE, tleceased. The Auditor appointed by the Court to audit, settle, and ailjust the account of CL'iMKNT KIDDLE, THOMAS A. HIDDLE, and ALEXANDER BID. DLK, trostees of a sum of fCd,ooo, set aside under the provisions of the will and codicils of (JUK1S TINU. JtlDPLE, deceased, and to report distribu tion or the balance In the bands of the account ants, will meet ti e parties Interested for the pur pose ol bis appointment, on WEDNESDAY, May 8. lsTt, at ia o'clock M., at his omca, No. 131 a, Fll'TU Street, In the City of Philadelphia. UEOKUE M. CUNAKItOE, i gothstpst Auditor. IN THE C.UKT OF COM MO IT PLEAS FOR THE CITY AND COUNT VT OF PHILADEL PHIA. In Diveree, December Term, No. 85. AKTULIt 11. WOODWARD vs. MELISSA T. WOOD WARD. To Melissa T. Woodward, the above-named re spondent : Please take notice that i ra'e has been entered In the above cade, returnable SATURDAY, May 6th, A. D. 1871, at 11 o cIock A. M., to show cause why a divorce a vinculo matrimonii should not be granted. I trsonal service having failed on ac cooiit of jour absence. JOHN O. BULLITT, No. 82 S. THIRD Street, Philadelphia, 4 20 thru2vv Attorney ft r Libellant. IN TF1E COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOiTthS CITY AND COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA. Dec. Term, 1S69. No. 3. Ill Divorce. MARGARET S. OHI EFKN3TEIN va. EDMUND aniEFENSTElN. To Edmund Crleieustelu, Respondent: l'leese take notice that the Court has granted a rule on you to show cause why a divorce a vinculo ltmtitmoiiit Blioulit not be dcorcf d In the above case. Returnable oe SATURDAY, May C, A. D. 1971, at 11 o'clock A. M. Peignnal service having failed on account of your absence. JOHN O. BULLITT, :No 82 South THIRD Street, Philadelphia, 4 S ttt Attorney for Libellant, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLES FOR TUB CITY AND COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA. March Term, 1S71. No. 14. In Divorce. WILLIAM HENRY STEEL vs. JObEPUlME JANE STEEL. To JOSEPHINE JANE STEBL, Respondent: Please take notice that testimony will be takea In above cntl'leU cause on behalf of the libellant oa THURSDAY, May 11, 1871, at 8 o'clock P. M., at my cilice, No. tB WALNUT Street. Philadelphia, Pa., before F. CARROLL RREWSTER, Jr.. Ed(j., the examiner appointed by the Court to take ana report the same. HENRY C. TERRY, 4 18 15t Attorney for Libellant. INSTATE OF JOHN KOMMKL, DEC EASE X l AU per so us indebted to this eBiat will make payment and those having claims apalnat the samo will pre si nt litem without delay to tuo uuderalgued, to vhoui Letters Testamentary have been duly giaiiUd. JOHN ROMMEL, Ja.,) J. M. ROMMEL, VExecntora. M' I XI A M M rtlladelphln, March iS, 1S71. 3 23tht CROOERIES, ETO. JONDON 11KOWN STOUT ANI SCOTCH ALB. Is class ar t stone, by the cask or dozen, 4LKKKT O. l!OI!!'ttT9, Dealer hi Fine rrwertea, earner ELEVENTH ana VINK 8UL Q A R A C A S CHOCOLATE, Imported and for sale by DALLETT k SON, -44 lm No. I2y b. FRONT btfeet.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers