Page:History of Freedom.djvu/588

 544

ESSAYS ON LIBERTY

more. They might conceivably contrive to bind and limit dogmatic infallibility with conditions so stringent as to evade many of the objections taken from the examples of history; but, in requiring submission to papal decrees on matters not articles of faith, they \vere approving that of which they knew the character, they were confirming without let or question a po\ver they saw in daily exercise, they were investing \vith ne\v authority the existing Bulls, and giving unqualified sanction to the Inquisition and the Index, to the murder of heretics and the deposing of kings. They approved what they \vere called on to reform, and solemnly blessed with their lips \vhat their hearts kne\v to be accursed. The Court of Rome became thenceforth reckless in its scorn of the opposition, and proceeded in the belief that there was no protest they would not forget, no principle they would not betray, rather than defy the Pope in his wrath. It \-vas at once determined to bring on the discussion of the dogma of infallibility. At first, \vhen the minority knew that their prayers and their sacrifices had been vain, and that they must rely on their own resources, they took courage in extremity. Rauscher, Schwarzen berg, Hefele, Ketteler, Kenrick, \vrote pamphlets, or caused them to be written, against the dogma, and circulated them in the Council. Several English bishops protested that the denial of infallibility by the Catholic episcopate had been an essential condition of emancipation, and that they could not revoke that assurance after it had served their purpose, without being dishonoured in the eyes of their countrymen. l The Archbishop of St. Louis, admitting the force of the argument, derived from the fact

1 The author of the protest afterwards gave the substance of his argument as follows: "Episcopi et theologi publice a Parlamento interrogati fu runt, utrum Catholici Angliae tenerent Papam posse definitiones relativas ad fidem et mores populis imponere absque omni consensu expresso vel tacito Ecc1esiae, Omnes Episcopi et theologi responderunt Catholicos hoc non tenere. Hisce respon- sionibus confisum Parlamentum Angliae Catholicos admisit ad participationem iurium Civllium. Quis Protestantibus persuadebit Catholicos contra honorem et bonam fidem non agere, qui quando agebatur de iuribus sibi acquirendis publice professi sunt ad fidem Catholicam non pertinere doctrinam infallibilitatis Romani Pontificis, statim autem ac obtinuerint quod volebant, a professione publice facta recedunt et contrarium affirmant? II