Pius IX — Part 3

Important as these statements were to an understanding of the church’s position on current political and theological issues, they were not as ominous as his ideas, soon to be declared infallible, on liberty of conscience. Included in his long list of errors, numbers 15 and 77 stood out as outrageous affronts to liberty of conscience. In these he declared that it was an error to promote the concept that—

This "error" destroyed liberty of conscience and certainly displayed an intolerance of others’ rights not demonstrated in the life of the One whose vicar Pius claimed to be. In another place the pope declared,

Remember, Pius declared this concept to be a deadly error.

Emphasizing the use of coercion of the conscience by implication, the Pontiff declared the view that—

to be an error. Still chafing under that which had occurred sixty-six years earlier when the Papacy received its deadly wound, Pius IX condemned individual freedom severely. It should not escape our attention that The Syllabus of Errors was proclaimed exactly one decade after the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary.

That the pope meant precisely what he wrote is evidenced by his shameful concordat with Ecuador, which he concluded two years earlier. There it was agreed that,

Other cited errors were equally shocking. Remember, these statements were declared by Pius to be errors. We cite:

Errors ? Certainly not!

So different from the silence of today’s Anglican Church, its British paper, Church Times, described the Syllabus as viewed with "disgust and derision." Even the satirical weekly periodical, Punch, published a poem in its first edition of 1865, which would win no prizes for poetry, but did emphasize its assessment. It stated in part:

For a pope who over five years later was to declare himself and all other popes infallible when speaking ex cathedra, this declaration surely prepared the way.

The Syllabus of Errors set a tone for Pius’ remaining fourteen years of office and revealed the philosophy behind his previous eighteen years as pope. It is little wonder that it soured relations between the Vatican and the United States, leading to the severance of diplomatic ties. It was shortly after the issuance of this encyclical that the American public laid at the feet of Roman Catholicism the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln. The encyclical was an unabashed statement of claimed authority, an authority which was to serve the Papacy well as it entered the less turbulent ecclesiastical waters of compliant ecumenism of the second half of the twentieth century.

The Syllabus of Errors also led to regretable persecution of Roman Catholics. It was the final straw for Prussian tolerance, especially when six years later Papal infallibility was proclaimed. Count Otto von Bismarck introduced the policy of Kulturkampf. This led to the closures of numerous seminaries and churches, and about 1800 priests were imprisoned. Even Bishop Eberhard was sent to prison in March 1874. Perhaps this persecution of German Roman Catholics was dwelt upon by Pius XII when he chose to remain silent in the face of German atrocities during the Nazi regime.

The First Vatican Council assembled December 8, 1869. It seemed that December 8 was a day of special significance for the pope with his three most important initiatives taken on that day. Top on the agenda was the proposed Dogma of Papal Infallibility. The Bishops were equally split between acquiescence and opposition. It was not a propitious commencement.

This Dogma stated,

Here was a claim directed not only to Roman Catholics but to "all Christians." Here was a dogma demanding that all spiritual power be vested in a single human being. This dogma centralized the authority of the Roman Catholic Church, reducing all other prelates to a place of subservience. The Council of Chalcedon convened in 451 bestowed "equal privileges" upon the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople. But Emperor Justinian a little over eighty years later declared the Bishop of Rome to possess sole primacy. Even Cardinal Manning, the archbishop of Westminster [London] declared that the proposed dogma "must overcome history." It most certainly bore no Scriptural authority. Peter certainly was fallible, as Scripture attests:

And make no mistake, this was in a matter of faith and doctrine—the continuation of Jewish ceremonies within the Christian church.

Bishops spoke in opposition. When Bishops ventured to declare that tradition was vital to doctrine, Pius rather immodestly declared, "I am the tradition." It was a sign of the growing arrogance of the Bishop of Rome.

Fully aware of the likely consequences of opposition to the pope’s initiative, it is little wonder that one bishop prefaced his remarks in opposition with the words, "It is not without trembling . . ." This was the Bishop of Diakovár, Bishop Josef Georg Strossmayer. Bishop Strossmayer was born on February 4, 1815 of German parents residing in Croatia. He was created Bishop of Diakovár, a city of Bosnia, on November 18, 1849.

In his address to the bishops, who wore white chasubles (white, sleeveless vestments), with white mitres on their heads, Bishop Strossmayer asserted that he had searched Scripture and the writings of the early Christian leaders and there found not—

These were telling words, but held in little consequence by those whose minds were closed to Scriptural evidence, and by a pope who believed that he was merely the mouthpiece for the Holy Ghost.

When Strossmayer summoned sufficient courage to state that the apostle Paul,

This was too much! Some bishops cried out "Silence! and Heretic!" But Strossmayer continued,

Turning to church history, Strossmayer declared,

This Council was held in North Africa. Clearly Rome, across the Mediterranean Sea, was held to possess no authority over them in Africa. That Council was held in the early fifth century. Strossmayer also provided much documentation that the rock upon which Christ built His church was Christ and His truth.

The bishop’s lengthy speech was later interrupted with calls from his fellow bishops of "Down from the pulpit. Quick, shut the mouth of the heretic!", "Get down, Out with the Protestant, the Calvinist, the traitor of the church!" Tolerance was not present at that Council. Strossmayer’s retort, "Your cries, Monsignori, do not frighten me. If my words are hot, my head is cool. I am neither of Luther nor of Calvin, nor of Paul, nor of Apollos, but of Christ," led to more interjections from the bishops, "Anathema! Anathema to the apostate." Strossmayer had delivered his soul, but his words, so far as bringing conviction to the corpus of bishops, were swept away with the same wind that uttered them. In the end, while not voting for the dogma, he did not attend to register a negative vote.

The Catholic Encyclopaedia stated,

Tragically he eventually succumbed to Papal pressure. Strossmayer had kept in contact with two prominent Roman Catholic academics who actively opposed the Dogma of Papal Infallibility. But in October, 1871, he finally notified the two men, Professors Döllinger and Reinkens, that he intended to yield, "at least outwardly," to the Papal Dogma. In his pastoral letter dated 28 February, 1881, Strossmayer expressed his devotion to the Papal See in extravagant terms. (Ibid.)

He died at the age of 90 on 8 April, 1905. His Croatian Christian names were Josip Juraj.

When on July 18, 1870 the fateful day of the vote was reached, 140 of the attending bishops felt it prudent to absent themselves, including two-thirds of the American bishops led by Archbishop Kenrick of St. Louis. Of the 433 bishops who voted in the positive over 300 were either titular bishops holding the title but not supervising a diocese, or were members of the Roman curia.

The fearful storms which raged during the one and a half hours of vote counting as the 435 bishops present individually were called upon to orally vote placet or non-placet was interrupted by flashes of lightening and sounds of crashing thunder. Some observers believed this to be God’s sign of His displeasure.

Only two bishops summoned sufficient courage to attend and vote non-placet: Bishop Fitzgerald of Little Rock, Arkansas and Bishop Riccio of Cajazzo in Naples. Yet even—

But the cowardly bishops who had absented themselves from the vote returned to their respective dioceses, many promoting the dogma they had spoken against and even less than truthfully stating that it was passed unanimously. Such is the peer pressure within a body of clergy, and the fear of loss of ordination that compels conformity to hierarchical power. Such fears are not confined to Roman Catholicism. Some dissenting bishops even turned against those who expressed identical views to their own. One who was excommunicated in such circumstances was Theology Professor Döllinger of Munich.

Pius IX’s long pontificate, at first evaluation, may be declared to be a relapse of the deadly wound. Politically his reactionary policies exacerbated the growing liberal and democratic sentiments in Europe and particularly within the Papal States, leading to the total loss of sovereignty which had only been restored fifty-five years earlier by the Treaty of Aix-la-Chappelle. In the religious realm he had effectively antagonized the Protestant nations by his dogmas and his condemnation of religious liberty in The Syllabus of Errors.

The deadly wound would never be completely healed until "all the world wondered after [admired] the beast" (Revelation 13:3). Pius died on February 7, 1878, with many of the world’s nations and their populations scorning his presumptuous decrees. Many would have concurred with the judgment of Charles Forbes René Montalembert, the grandson of the French Marquis, Marc René Montalembert. His second name was taken from the surname of his English mother. Charles Montalembert had stated that Pius IX was "The idol in the Vatican" who had invested himself—

Yet even he, before his death, just four months before the dogma was voted,

Yet it must not be overlooked that this pope reestablished the Roman Catholic hierarchy in England (1850) and the Netherlands (1853). When the Prussian Government under Count Otto von Bismarck introduced the policy of Kulturkampf, the struggle between the German Government and the Roman Catholic Church which began in 1872 when the Government demanded control over marriages, schools and ecclesiastical appointments, the German Roman Catholic Church put up a spirited defense and demonstrated that it had mustered sufficient political power to oppose even the might of the new Germany bolstered in power and prestige by victory in the Franco-Prussian War.