FOOTNOTES:

"XLV. The entire government of public schools in which the youth of any Christian state is educated, except (to a certain extent) in the case of episcopal seminaries, may and ought to appertain to the civil power, and belong to it so far that no other authority whatsoever shall be recognized as having any right to interfere in the discipline of the schools, the arrangement of the studies, the conferring of degrees, in the choice or approval of the teachers".

The forty-seventh adds:

"XLVII. The best theory of civil society requires that popular schools open to the children of every class of the people, and, generally, all public institutes intended for instruction in letters and philosophical sciences, and for carrying on the education of youth, should be freed from all ecclesiastical authority, control, and interference, and should be fully subjected to the civil and political power, at the pleasure of the rulers and according to the standard of the prevalent opinions of the age".

The forty-eighth bears on the same subject:

"XLVIII. Catholics may approve of a system of educating youth, unconnected with Catholic faith and the power of the Church, and which regards the knowledge of merely natural things, and only, or at least primarily, the ends of earthly social life".

Let our readers attentively consider these propositions. They undoubtedly reprobate what is called mixed education, or the system which endeavours to separate education from religion, as the Queen's Colleges profess to do. They appear to us also most distinctly to condemn the principles on which the National Schools are founded. In many of those schools all religious education is excluded, and in those which are under Presbyterian and other similar patrons, as well as in model and training schools, the rights of the bishops of the Catholic Church, to whom Christ gave the power of teaching all nations, are completely ignored. In every National School the teaching and practice of religion are strictly prohibited during the hours of class. Such a system appears to fall under the condemnation of the Holy See. We shall return to this matter again on some future occasion. In the mean time, we shall merely add, that if we wish to be true children of the Church, we must receive with humility, and in a spirit of obedience, the decisions of Christ's vicar on Earth, and reprobate and condemn from the inmost of our hearts the propositionswhich he, using the power given to him by the Eternal Shepherd of our souls, reprobates and condemns. The only view his Holiness proposed to himself in censuring the propositions we refer to was, to secure for the rising generations the greatest blessing that can be conferred on them—a good religious education, and the preservation of their faith from danger. As dutiful members of the true Church we ought to act on the lessons of wisdom that have been given to us.

Having treated at some length of the education question, the Archbishop next directed the attention of the meeting to the condition of the agricultural and manufacturing interests of Ireland, showing that it is the duty of those in power to apply immediate remedies to the evils of the country, which menace us with universal ruin, and then proceeded to examine the proposed disendowment of the Protestant Establishment. History informs us that the Irish Protestant Church had its origin in an act declaring Henry VIII. head of the Church, which was passed by the Irish parliament in 1536, and in another act of the same parliament by which a similar dignity was conferred on Queen Elizabeth. A statement on this subject made by Dr. Gregg, Protestant Bishop of Cork, in a late pastoral charge, is altogether at variance with history. His Lordship's words are:

"She (the Protestant Church) sprang from the truth, was nurtured in truth, laden with truth, in truth she delights, to the truth she appeals, and by God's gracious blessing, in mighty truth shall she stand".

These are emphatic words; but, if he wished to speak correctly, the writer should have said that the Church he eulogises sprang from the passions and despotism of Henry VIII.; was nurtured by the avarice, hypocrisy, ambition, and corruption of Elizabeth; derived spiritual powers from a body of men who had no such powers themselves; that to the sword, the gibbet, and penal laws she owes her propagation; that her existence still depends upon brute force; and that, so little does she stand on or uphold truth, that she is not able to defend the Gospel any longer, or to support the doctrines and ordinances of religion. She could not restrain the late Protestant Archbishop of Dublin from explaining away the fundamental mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation, nor Dr. Colenso from denying the inspiration of the Sacred Scriptures, nor Rev. Mr. Barlow, a Fellow of Trinity College, from impugning the eternity of punishment in another world. She affords so little light to her children, that, according to a report of the Church Pastoral Aid Society, signed by several dignitaries of the Establishment, millions of those children are pining awayin worse than pagan vice and ignorance. Finally, so farfrom resting on truth, her only support is the arm of the State, whose creature she is, and at whose nod she may cease to exist.

Having obtained spiritual authority by an act of the temporal power, much in the same way as the Roman emperors obtained divine honours by decrees of the senate, Henry VIII. and Elizabeth set about their new functions, and determined to show themselves worthy leaders of the Reformation. There were many richly endowed monasteries in Ireland at the time of Henry, and several continued to exist even till the days of Elizabeth. The inmates of those institutions passed their time in prayer and study; they had rendered great services to literature by copying and preserving the works of classical antiquity, whilst their labours for religion and the poor were worthy of the highest praise. There were also many convents of religious ladies, who devoted their lives to the service of God and their neighbour, to the education of youth, and who edified the world by the sweet odour of their virtues. By the new heads of the Church, and the new patrons of the Gospel, those merits were looked on as crimes, and all religious orders were suppressed.

In Ireland there was an ancient institution founded by St. Patrick, which for more than a thousand years had maintained its connection with the Apostolic See, the true rock on which Christ built His Church, and had always preserved the integrity and purity of the Catholic faith. The existence of that venerable Irish Church was not consistent with the supremacy of the crown in spiritual matters, and its destruction was decreed.

At the same time, a religion, with new doctrines, a new ceremonial, new liturgical books, and forms of prayer in the English language, then almost unknown in Ireland, was proclaimed, and all the sanction was given to it that could be derived from an act of parliament or a royal decree. It was pretended that this religion was to restore liberty of conscience to the world; but history shows that it enforced its teaching by penal laws, by fire and sword, and by every sort of violence.

The monasteries of men, the convents of nuns, the episcopal sees, and the parochial churches, were possessed, at that time, of considerable revenues. This property was not the gift of the English government. In great part it was of ancient origin, as we may conclude from the fact that in the year 1179, shortly after the English invasion, Pope Alexander III. confirmed to St. Laurence O'Toole nearly the same possessions which are still held by the see of Dublin, and which he had inherited from his predecessors who lived before English rule began in Ireland. It was also private property, belonging to monasteries and convents, and to the Church, so that neither king nor parliament had any claim on it. But ancient rights and justice and prescription wereno longer to be respected; the reforming monarchs did not hesitate to change the law of God and of nature, and to ignore the maxim that every one should have his own. Hence, all ecclesiastical property was confiscated. A large portion was given to the agents and minions of royal despotism, and another portion was devoted to the support of bishops and ministers of a new creed and religion, and turned away altogether from the purposes for which it had been destined by the donors; so that what was originally given for the support of the Catholic Church was now handed over to an establishment just called into existence, whose principal aim has always been to decry and misrepresent the ancient Church, to persecute its ministers, and to uproot it, if possible, from the soil.

The heads of the Irish Protestant Establishment, Henry and Elizabeth, having commenced their spiritual rule by an act of robbery and spoliation, continued to propagate their new religion by intimidation, by violence, and penal enactments. The old nobility of Ireland, both of Norman and Irish descent, were persecuted and robbed of their possessions in order to convince them of that Gospel truth which first beamed from Boleyn's eyes; for the same purpose whole provinces were laid desolate, and torrents of blood inhumanly shed. In such proceedings we find a great deal to remind us of the persecutions inflicted on the early Christians by the Roman emperors and a singular resemblance to the system adopted by Mahomet for the propagation of the impure doctrines of the Koran; and as that impostor spread desolation through the most flourishing regions of the East, so did the founders of the Protestant establishment reduce the blooming fields of Erin to the condition of a howling wilderness, and like him they became the votaries of ignorance, and carried on a long and destructive war against Catholic schools and education.

There was, however, something worse in the mode of propagating the doctrines of the Reformation than in that which was adopted for the maintenance or introduction of Paganism and Mahometanism. Those forms of worship openly avowed their designs, and publicly professed their enmity to the Christian religion. The proceedings of those who promoted and supported the Church Establishment were, on the contrary, marked by the vilest and most degrading hypocrisy. They pretended and professed to be the sincere friends of liberty of conscience, and of the progress of education and enlightenment, whilst at the same time they were the most dangerous enemies of every kind of freedom and progress, and endeavoured to establish the most galling despotism, and to spread ignorance through Ireland.

Innumerable proofs are at hand of the despotic tendencies of theEstablishment. We merely give one instance, related by Mant in hisEcclesiastical Historyat the year 1636, in which the Protestant bishops, with Usher at their head, made the following declaration:—that

"The religion of the Papists is superstitious and idolatrous; their faith and doctrine erroneous and heretical; their Church, in respect to both, apostatical. To give them, therefore, a toleration, or to consent that they may freely exercise their religion and profess their faith and doctrine, is a grievous sin."—Mant, vol. i. p. 510.

And recollect that this declaration was made against the ancient religion of the country, a religion established in it for more than one thousand years, and that it was made for the purpose of excluding millions of the people from every office of trust and emolument. Nothing worse can be found in the annals of Paganism or Mahometanism. The Archbishop continues:

"But, passing over a remoter period, have we not to regret that the spirit which then prevailed still continues to manifest itself in our own days? And, indeed, were not the heads of the Protestant establishment the most active opponents of Catholic Emancipation? Who were the great promoters of the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill? Was not the head of the Establishment, in this city, most anxious, a few years ago, to put convents and monasteries under police control, and to give every annoyance to the holy and pious virgins who devote themselves to the service of God and the poor? And are not the principles acted on by the Establishment still embodied in Protestant oaths? and can we be surprised that dissensions exist in this country, and that it is reduced to so deplorable a state as it is now in, when we reflect that by such oaths and declarations discord is excited in the country, rulers and subjects placed in a state of hostility, and the people divided into factions and parties?"

As to education, we shall merely observe that the supporters of the Establishment left no means untried to banish it altogether from among the masses of the people in Ireland. Catholic schools were suppressed, and their property confiscated; the erection of new schools prohibited; no Catholic parent allowed to give a Catholic education to his children at home, and he was subjected to the severest penalties if he sent them to foreign schools. What more could be done to suppress the knowledge of the Christian religion by a Julian or a Mahomet? Yet, those who acted in that way cry out that they alone are the friends of progress and enlightenment, and that Catholics seek for nothing but darkness. Was there ever a more decided manifestation of recklessness and hypocrisy?

Having given in detail some other instances of the violent and persecuting measures which were used for the propagation ofProtestantism, the Archbishop proceeds to examine the results obtained by them:—

"Let us now ask", says he, "what have been the fruits of so much bigotry, of so much violence, and of so many penal laws? The late census tells us that every effort to introduce Protestantism has been a complete failure, and that notwithstanding so many persecutions and sufferings, the old Catholic faith is still the religion of the land, deeply rooted in the affections of the people. Without entering into details which would occasion too much delay, I shall merely state that all the members of the Establishment in this kingdom are under seven hundred thousand; that out of the two thousand four hundred and twenty-eight parishes into which Ireland is divided, there were, in 1861, one hundred and ninety-nine parishes containing no members of the Establishment, five hundred and seventy-five parishes containing not more than twenty, four hundred and sixteen containing between twenty and fifty, three hundred and forty-nine containing between fifty and one hundred—in all, one thousand five hundred and thirty-nine parishes, each with fewer than one hundred parishioners. I will add that, according to the same census, the parish of St. Peter's, in Dublin, contains more Catholics than the eleven dioceses of Kilmacduagh, Kilfenora, Killala, Achonry, Ossory, Cashel, Emly, Waterford, Lismore, Ross, and Clonfert contain Protestants: and that the Catholics of the diocese of Dublin exceed by thirty-five thousand all the Protestants of the Established Church in twenty-eight dioceses of Ireland; indeed, in all the dioceses of Ireland, excepting those of Armagh, Clogher, Down, and Dublin. Whilst such figures show that all the protection of the State, the persecution of Catholics, the confiscation of their property, the suppression of Catholic schools, the lavish endowment of Protestant schools, and innumerable penal laws, have not been able to establish Protestantism in Ireland, they must convince us at the same time, that it is most unreasonable, and contrary to the interests of the people and to a sound policy, to keep up a vast and expensive ecclesiastical establishment for the sake of so small a minority, and in opposition to the wishes of the great mass of the population".

The Archbishop next quoted several authorities from Protestant writers condemnatory of the Anglican establishment, and among others, that of Lord Brougham, who, confirming his own views by those of the celebrated Edmund Burke, says:

"I well remember a phrase used by one not a foe of Church Establishments—I mean Mr. Burke. 'Don't talk of its being a church! It is a wholesale robbery!'... I have, my lords, heard it called an anomaly, and I say that it is an anomaly of so gross a kind, that it outrages every principle of common sense, and every one endowed with common reason must feel that it is the most gross outrage to that common sense as it is also to justice. Such an establishment, kept up for such a purpose, kept up by such means, and upheld by such asystem, is a thing wholly peculiar to Ireland, and could be tolerated nowhere else. That such a system should go on in the nineteenth century; that such a thing should go on while all the arts are in a forward and onward course, while all the sciences are progressing, while all morals and religion too—for, my lords, there never was more of religion and morality than is now presented in all parts of the country,—that this gross abuse, the most outrageous of all, should be allowed to continue, is really astonishing. It cannot be upheld, unless the tide of knowledge shall turn back, unless we return to the state in which things were a couple of centuries ago".

After quoting several other authorities similar to that of Lord Brougham, the Archbishop called on his hearers to unite with him in calling for the abolition of the Establishment.

"When you consider", said he, "the reasons and the weight of authority which I have alleged, I trust you all will admit that an establishment which traces back its origin to the lust, the avarice, and the despotism of Henry VIII. and his daughter; an establishment introduced by force and violence, and that has no support save in the protection of the state, of which it is the creature and the slave; an establishment that has been the persevering enemy of civil and religious liberty; that has called for penal laws in every century from the days of Elizabeth to the passing of the Ecclesiastical Titles Act; that has never failed to oppose every proposal for the relaxation of such laws, not only in the days of Strafford and Clarendon, but even when there was question of emancipation in the midst of the liberality of the present century; an establishment that has inflicted great evils on Ireland by depriving the mass of the people of all the means of education, by persecuting schoolmasters, and seizing on and confiscating schools, and that has been always the fruitful source of dissensions in the country—when you consider all these things, you will undoubtedly agree with me, that such an establishment ought not to be any longer tolerated in this country—that it ought to be disendowed, and its revenues applied to purposes of public utility".

FOOTNOTES:[24]In the report of the Endowed Schools Commission of 1858, p. 284, there is an excellent letter of Baron Hughes on mixed education. Having observed that in England Protestant bishops and noblemen are opposed to it, he says: "I am convinced that the mixed system is wrong in principle, and cannot, even if right, be carried out in Ireland. I believe that the separate system is sound in principle; and if that is doubted, I think it is worthy of being submitted to a fair trial, as the only alternative the state can adopt".

[24]In the report of the Endowed Schools Commission of 1858, p. 284, there is an excellent letter of Baron Hughes on mixed education. Having observed that in England Protestant bishops and noblemen are opposed to it, he says: "I am convinced that the mixed system is wrong in principle, and cannot, even if right, be carried out in Ireland. I believe that the separate system is sound in principle; and if that is doubted, I think it is worthy of being submitted to a fair trial, as the only alternative the state can adopt".

In answer to the request made in our last number, some of our reverend friends have addressed to us several most interesting questions on Liturgical points. Owing to the great pressure this month on our limited space, and to the necessity of completing the series of decrees on the Holy Mass, we are not able to attend to them for this month. In our next issue we hope to be in a position to satisfy our respected correspondents.

Ad §. IX.Post Consecrationem usque ad Orationem Dominicam.

1. Dum Sacerdos dicit orationem "Supplices te rogamus", et orationes ante Communionem,servandae sunt rubricae, quae jubent manus ponendas esse super altare, non intra corporale. 7. Sept. 1816 in u. Tuden, ad 35.

2. Qui in Canone Missae post consecrationem, in oratione "Nobis quoque peccatoribus", nominatur Joannes, est s. Joannes Baptista, et ideo caput est ad hoc nomen inclinandum, dum Missa dicitur aut commemoratio fit de s. Joanne Baptista;nonvero quando Missa dicitur aut commemoratio fit de s. Joanne apostolo et evangelista. 27. Mart. 1824. in u. Panormit. ad 2.

Ad §. X.De Oratione Dominica usque ad factam Communionem.

1. Signum cum patena faciendum a sacerdote a fronte ad pectus, dum dicit orationem "Libera nos quaesumus Domine", debet esseintegrum signum crucis; et post dictum signum crucisest deosculanda patena. 13. Mart. 1627 in u. Panorm.—Cum Celebrans dicit: "Da pacem Domine in diebus nostris",patenam in extremitate, seu oram patenae, congruentius osculatur. 24. Jun. 1683 in u. Albingan. ad 5.

2.Pax, dummodo adsit consuetudo, in Missa pro sponso et sponsa dari potest; attamendanda est semper cum instrumento, numquam vero cum patena. 10 Jan., 1852 in u. Cenoman. ad. 8.

3. Parsinferiorhostiaepraecidi debet, non superior, quando dicitur: "Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum". 4 Aug. 1663 in u. Dalmat. ad 6.

4.Tolerari potestconsuetudo pulsandi campanulam a ministro in Missa non solum ad verba "Sanctus", etc. et in elevatione Sanctissimi, sed etiam ad verba "Domine non sum dignus" ante sumptionem, et quoties administratur Communio fidelibus, ad praedicta verba. 14 Mai. 1846 in u. Ord. Min. ad 9.

5. Sacerdos scipsum signans cum hostia et calice consecratis ante sumptionem Ss. Sacramenti, ad verba "Jesu Christi" debet caput inclinarejuxta rubricas. 24 Sept. 1842 in u. Neap. ad 1.

6. In quaestione: an Sacerdos post sumptionem pretiosissimi sanguinis debeat parumper immorari in adoratione, prout fit post sumptionem sacrae hostiae?serventur rubricae. 24 Sept. 1842 in u. Neap. ad. 2.

7. In quaestione: an pro abluendis vino et aqua pollicibus et indicibus in secunda purificatione post Communionem debeat Sacerdos e medio altaris versus cornu epistolae recedere?serventur rubricae pro diversitate Missae.[25]22 Jul. 1848 in u. Tornac.

8.Ante versiculum quod dicitur "Communio", coöperiendus est velo calix in anteriori parte, prout ante confessionem.1 Mart. 1698 in u. Prag. ad 1.—Tam in principio Missae quam post Communionem calix velatus esse debet totus in parte anteriori.12 Jan. 1669 in u. Urbinat.—In quaestione: an deceat corporale retinere extensum super altare toto tempore, quo celebrantur Missae, et donec ab ultimo in eo celebrante reportetur ad sacrarium (sacristiam); et an conveniat corporale extra bursam deferre?episcopus incumbat observantiae et executioni rubricarum.13 Sept. 1704 in u. Ravenat.

9. De Communione fidelium intra Missam:

Consuetudodicendi: "Ecce Agnus Die", et: "Domino non sum dignus", idiomate vulgari,est eliminanda, utpote contraria Rituali et Missali Romano. 23. Mai. 1835 in u. Ord. Min. Capuc. Helv. ad 5.

Sacerdosdebetsemper, etiam communicando moniales habentes fenestrellam in parte evangelii, pro Communione distribuendadescendere et reverti per gradus ante riores, et non laterales altaris. 15 Sept., 1736, in u. Tolet. ad 8.

Dum Celebrans administrat sacram Communionem in Missa privata, ministernondebet eum comitari cum cereo accenso; sed quum purificationem, utpote quae pro populo non est in usu,[26]non praebeat, nec mappam Communionis, utpote cancellis affixam, ante communicantes sustineat, tunc debet manere genuflexus in latere epistolae. 12 Aug. 1854 ad 72. (Anal. II p. 2188 sqq.)

Servetur consuetudo dividendi consecratas particulas, si adsit necessitas.16 Mart. 1833 in u. Veron. ad 1.

In Communione quae inter Missae sacrificium peragitur,minister sacrificii, non ratione praeeminentiae, sed ministerii, praeferendus est ceteris quamvis dignioribus. 13 Jul. 1658 in u. Galliar.

Patenae suppositio per sacerdotem cotta indutum in Communione generali, quae per Dignitates agitur, retinenda est.3 Sept. 1661 in u. Andrien.—Nonpotest sacerdos sanctam Communionem sive intra sive extra Missam administrans tenere patenam interdigitos manus sinistrae, quae sacram pixidem gestat, ut eam sic mento communicantium supponat, sedcura et solertia sacerdotis supplere debet, ut praecaveatur sacrorum fragmentorum disperditio. 12 Aug. 1854 ad 21 et 22 loc. cit.

Ad §. XII.De benedictione in fine Missae, et Evangelio Sancti Joannis.

1.In fine Missae ad quodcumque altare celebratae, fit reverentia Cruci infra gradus, capite discoöperto.13 Febr. 1666 in decret. ad Missal. ad 9.

2.Arbitrio et prudentiae Ordinariirelinquitur inducere praxim lavandi manus in fine Missae, postquam Celebrans exuerit vestes sacerdotales, in dioecesim, in qua non est in usu;sed noninducaturper modum praecepti. 12 Aug. 1854 ad 28 (Anal. II. p 2193).

FOOTNOTES:[25]Missae diversitatem, de qua decretum loquitur, ita intellexerunt ac suo tempore exposuerunt ipsius decreti auctores h. e. doctores Romani a. 1848, ut inMissis solemnibus numquamsit e medio altaris recedendum ad abluendos digitos; inMissis non solemnibuse contrasempere medio sit ad cornu Epistolae progrediendum (licet rubrica de hoc progressu sileat). Haec sententia ipsorum auctorum decreti atque interpretatio praeclare confirmatur ex universali ac constanti omnium totius Urbis ecclesiarum praxi. Cf. Attestat. Romani s. Theologiae Professoris apud Falise p. 77: "Dum revertitur e cornu Epistolae in medium altaris, digitos purificatorio abstergit".[26]Juxta Merati (Comment. ad hanc rubr. n. 34) haec purificatio retinetur solummodo "in aliquibus ecclesiis", Ubi illa non est in usu, ejusmodi consuetudo servanda est. 12. Aug. 1854 ad 23. loc. supra cit.

[25]Missae diversitatem, de qua decretum loquitur, ita intellexerunt ac suo tempore exposuerunt ipsius decreti auctores h. e. doctores Romani a. 1848, ut inMissis solemnibus numquamsit e medio altaris recedendum ad abluendos digitos; inMissis non solemnibuse contrasempere medio sit ad cornu Epistolae progrediendum (licet rubrica de hoc progressu sileat). Haec sententia ipsorum auctorum decreti atque interpretatio praeclare confirmatur ex universali ac constanti omnium totius Urbis ecclesiarum praxi. Cf. Attestat. Romani s. Theologiae Professoris apud Falise p. 77: "Dum revertitur e cornu Epistolae in medium altaris, digitos purificatorio abstergit".

[26]Juxta Merati (Comment. ad hanc rubr. n. 34) haec purificatio retinetur solummodo "in aliquibus ecclesiis", Ubi illa non est in usu, ejusmodi consuetudo servanda est. 12. Aug. 1854 ad 23. loc. supra cit.

Urbis et Orbis.—Cum non sit aliud Nomen sub coelo, in quo nos oportet salvos fieri, nisi Nomen Iesu in quo est vita, salus, et resurrectio nostra, per quem salvati et liberati sumus, idcirco Sixtus V. fel. rec. Pont. Max. sub die 11 Iulii 1587 in BullaReddituriIndulgentiam concessit quinquaginta dierum omnibus et singulis Christifidelibus qui quocumque idiomate sic se salutaverint:Laudetur Iesus Christus, vel responderint:In saecula, velAmen, autSemper; plenariam vero in mortis articulo iis qui hanc laudabilem consuetudinem habuerint, modo ore, vel corde (si ore non potuerint) Iesu nomen invocaverint.

Nonnullis deinde in locis cum mos invaluisset Iesu Nomini et illud Mariae in se invicem salutando addere, Clemens PP. XIII. ad humillimas preces Generalis Ordinis Carmelitarum per Decretum die 30 Novembris 1762 benigne impertitus est pro Carmelitis eamdem Indulgentiam quinquaginta dierum quotiescumque in mutua salutatione verba usurpaverint:Sia lodato Gesù e Maria.[27]

Nunc vero SS mus. Dominus NosterPius Papa IX.nonnullorum Episcoporum precibus peramanter inclinatus, referente me infrascripto Sacrae Congregationis Indulgentiarum Cardinali Praefecto in Audientia diei 26 Septembris 1864, ut magis magisque Fidelesutriusque Nominis Iesu et Mariae salutares percipiant effectus, et illa quam saepissime in ore et corde retineant, camdem concessionem ad omnes et singulos Christifideles extendit, ita ut qui se invicem salutando hac forma, in quocumque idiomate, utantur:Sia lodato Gesù e Maria,[28]vel responderint:Oggi e sempre,[29]aut similibus verbis, easdem plane Indulgentias, quae in praefata Bulla memorantur, consequi possint et valeant. Quam gratiam voluitSanctitas Suaperpetuo suffragari absque ulla Brevis expeditione.

Datum Romae ex Secretaria eiusdem Sacrae Congregationis Indulgentiis Sacrisque Reliquiis praepositae. Die 26 Septembris 1864.

Fr. Antonius M. Card. Panebianco S. C. Praefectus.Loco † Signi.A. Colombo Secretarius.

The following letter on the manner in which, in missionary countries, the Blessed Eucharist is to be conveyed to the sick, is a fresh proof of the zeal of the Holy See in promoting devotion to the Most Holy Sacrament.

Illustrissime et Reverendissime Domine,Etsi sancta omnia sancte tractanda sint, propterea quod ad Deum pertineant qui essentialiter sanctus est, attamen augustissimum Eucharistiae sacramentum sicut sacris mysteriis omnibus absque ulla comparatione sanctitate praeeminet, ita maxima prae ceteris veneratione est pertractandum. Nil itaque mirum si tot Ecclesia diversis temporibus ediderit decreta, quibus Sanctissimae Eucharistiae delatio pro adjunctorum varietate vel denegaretur omnino, vel ea qua par esset reverentia admitteretur;[30]cum nihil antiquius fuerit Ecclesiae Dei quam ut animarum profectum atque aedificationem debito cum honore divinorum omnium divinissimi mysterii consociaret. Haec porro prae oculis habens Sacrum hoc Consilium Christiano Nomini Propagando, cum primum intellexit in quibusdam istius regionis Dioecesibus consuetudinem seu potius abusum invaluisse, ut Sacerdotes Sanctissimum Sacramentum a mane usque ad vesperam secum deferrent ea tantum de causa quod in aliquem forte aegrotum incidere possent, ad Metropolitanos censuit scribendum, tum ut consuetudinem illam ab Ecclesiae praxi omnino abhorrere declararet, tum etiam ut ejus extensionem accuratius deprehenderet. Responsa Archiepiscoporum brevi ad Sacram Congregationem pervenerunt, ex quibus innotuit, multis in locis de abusu illo gravem admirationem exortam esse, cum aliqua in Dioecesi ne credibilis quidem videretur.Verum non defuerunt Antistites qui illius existentiam ejusque causas ingenue confessi sunt. Quare Eminentissimis Patribus Sacri hujus Consilii in generalibus comitiis die 28 Septembris elapsi anni habitis omnia quae ad hanc rem referebantur exhibita sunt perpendenda, ut quid Sanctissimi Sacramenti debitus honor ac veneratio postularent in Domino decerneretur. Omnibus igitur maturo examini subjectis, statuerunt Eminentissimi Patres literas encyclicas ad Archiepiscopos atque Episcopos istius regionis dandas esse, quibus constans Ecclesiae rigor circa Eucharistiae delationem commemoraretur. Voluit insuper S. C. ut singuli Antistites excitarentur, quemadmodum praesentium tenore excitantur, ad communem Ecclesiae disciplinam hac in re custodiendam, quantum temporis ac locorum adjuncta nec non inductarum consuetudinum ratio patiantur, ita tamen ut sedulam navent operam ad veros abusus corrigendos atque eliminandos. Quam quidem in rem censuerunt Patres Eminentissimi apprime conferre frequentem celebrationem sacrificii missae, quo videlicet Sacerdotes facile necessitati occurrere possunt Sanctissimam Eucharistiam secum per multos dies retinendi. Quae cum ita sint hortor Amplitudinem Tuam ut in eum finem rurales aediculas multiplicandas cures, atque talia edas decreta ex quibus delatio Sanctissimi Sacramenti ad urgentes tantum causas, atque ad actuale ministerii sacerdotalis exercitium coarctetur, injuncta vero presbyteris stricta obligatione semper in hisce casibus Sanctam Hostiam super pectus deferendi. Denique decreverunt Eminentissimi Patres ut de negotio isto gravissimo in Provincialibus Conciliis agatur, quo nimirum Antistites eam in suis dioecesibus communem normam inducere satagant, quam augustissimum Eucharistiae mysterium decere existimaverint. Tandem Amplitudini Tuae significare non praetermitto omnia et singula quae superius decreta sunt Sanctissimo D. N. Pio PP. IX. per me relata fuisse in audientia diei 3 Octobris elapsi anni, eaque a Sanctitate Sua in omnibus adprobata fuisse atque apostolica auctoritate confirmata.Datum Romae ex Aedibus S. Congregationis de Propaganda Fide die 25 Februarii 1859.

Illustrissime et Reverendissime Domine,

Etsi sancta omnia sancte tractanda sint, propterea quod ad Deum pertineant qui essentialiter sanctus est, attamen augustissimum Eucharistiae sacramentum sicut sacris mysteriis omnibus absque ulla comparatione sanctitate praeeminet, ita maxima prae ceteris veneratione est pertractandum. Nil itaque mirum si tot Ecclesia diversis temporibus ediderit decreta, quibus Sanctissimae Eucharistiae delatio pro adjunctorum varietate vel denegaretur omnino, vel ea qua par esset reverentia admitteretur;[30]cum nihil antiquius fuerit Ecclesiae Dei quam ut animarum profectum atque aedificationem debito cum honore divinorum omnium divinissimi mysterii consociaret. Haec porro prae oculis habens Sacrum hoc Consilium Christiano Nomini Propagando, cum primum intellexit in quibusdam istius regionis Dioecesibus consuetudinem seu potius abusum invaluisse, ut Sacerdotes Sanctissimum Sacramentum a mane usque ad vesperam secum deferrent ea tantum de causa quod in aliquem forte aegrotum incidere possent, ad Metropolitanos censuit scribendum, tum ut consuetudinem illam ab Ecclesiae praxi omnino abhorrere declararet, tum etiam ut ejus extensionem accuratius deprehenderet. Responsa Archiepiscoporum brevi ad Sacram Congregationem pervenerunt, ex quibus innotuit, multis in locis de abusu illo gravem admirationem exortam esse, cum aliqua in Dioecesi ne credibilis quidem videretur.Verum non defuerunt Antistites qui illius existentiam ejusque causas ingenue confessi sunt. Quare Eminentissimis Patribus Sacri hujus Consilii in generalibus comitiis die 28 Septembris elapsi anni habitis omnia quae ad hanc rem referebantur exhibita sunt perpendenda, ut quid Sanctissimi Sacramenti debitus honor ac veneratio postularent in Domino decerneretur. Omnibus igitur maturo examini subjectis, statuerunt Eminentissimi Patres literas encyclicas ad Archiepiscopos atque Episcopos istius regionis dandas esse, quibus constans Ecclesiae rigor circa Eucharistiae delationem commemoraretur. Voluit insuper S. C. ut singuli Antistites excitarentur, quemadmodum praesentium tenore excitantur, ad communem Ecclesiae disciplinam hac in re custodiendam, quantum temporis ac locorum adjuncta nec non inductarum consuetudinum ratio patiantur, ita tamen ut sedulam navent operam ad veros abusus corrigendos atque eliminandos. Quam quidem in rem censuerunt Patres Eminentissimi apprime conferre frequentem celebrationem sacrificii missae, quo videlicet Sacerdotes facile necessitati occurrere possunt Sanctissimam Eucharistiam secum per multos dies retinendi. Quae cum ita sint hortor Amplitudinem Tuam ut in eum finem rurales aediculas multiplicandas cures, atque talia edas decreta ex quibus delatio Sanctissimi Sacramenti ad urgentes tantum causas, atque ad actuale ministerii sacerdotalis exercitium coarctetur, injuncta vero presbyteris stricta obligatione semper in hisce casibus Sanctam Hostiam super pectus deferendi. Denique decreverunt Eminentissimi Patres ut de negotio isto gravissimo in Provincialibus Conciliis agatur, quo nimirum Antistites eam in suis dioecesibus communem normam inducere satagant, quam augustissimum Eucharistiae mysterium decere existimaverint. Tandem Amplitudini Tuae significare non praetermitto omnia et singula quae superius decreta sunt Sanctissimo D. N. Pio PP. IX. per me relata fuisse in audientia diei 3 Octobris elapsi anni, eaque a Sanctitate Sua in omnibus adprobata fuisse atque apostolica auctoritate confirmata.

Datum Romae ex Aedibus S. Congregationis de Propaganda Fide die 25 Februarii 1859.

Amplitudinis TuaeAd officia paratissimusAl. C. Barnabo, Praef.Cajet Archiepiscopus Thebar. Secretarius.R. P. D. Paulo Cullen,Archiepiscopo Dublinensi.

Amplitudinis TuaeAd officia paratissimusAl. C. Barnabo, Praef.Cajet Archiepiscopus Thebar. Secretarius.

R. P. D. Paulo Cullen,Archiepiscopo Dublinensi.

1.Ex dubiis propositis pro christianis Sinensibus.Ad propositum dubium "An sacerdotibus Sinensibus liceat in itineribus quae longissima sunt secum deferre Eucharistiam ne ea priventur?" Resp. Non licere. Qualificatores S. O. die 27 Martii 1665, et Eminentissimi approbarunt die 15 April. 1665.2. Pro Gubernatoribus navium Lusitaniae qui singulis annis in Indias orientales navigant, petentibus licentiam deferendi sacramentum Eucharistiae, ne nautae et Rectores sine Viatico decedant. Lecto memoriali et auditis votis Sanctissimus supradictam petitionem omninorejecit; ita quod nec in posterum ullo modo de ea tractetur. S. C. S. O. die 13 Julii 1660.3. Bened. XIV.Inter omnigenas"pro Incolis Regni Serviae et finitimarum Regionum". "At ubi (sicuti ibidem legitur) Turcarum vis praevalet et iniquitas, sacerdos stolam semper habeat coopertam vestibus; in sacculo seu bursa pixidem recondat quam per funiculos collo appensam in sinu reponat et nunquam solus procedat, sed uno saltem fideli, in defectu Clerici, associetur".4. Honorius III. in cap.Sanede celebratione Miss. expresse habet de delatione Eucharistiae quod si "in partibus infidelium ob necessitatem S. Viatici permittitur, tamen extra necessitatem permittenda non est, cum hodie Ecclesiastica lege absolute prohibitum sit ut occulte deferatur. Occulte deferre in itinere, nequit moraliter fieri absque irreverentia tanti sacramenti".5. Verricelli de Apostolicis Missionibus Tit. 8. pag. 136. expendit, "An liceat in novo Orbe Missionariis S. Eucharistiam collo appensam secum in itinere occulte deferre etc. et quidquid sit de veteri disciplina concludit hodie universalis Ecclesiae consuetudine et plurimorum Conciliorum decretis prohibitum est deferre occulte S. Eucharistiam in itinere, nisi pro communicando infirmo, ubi esset timor et periculum infidelium, et dummodo ad infirmum non sit nimis longum iter sed modicum et unius diei".6. Thomas a Jesu de procur. salut. omnium gentium lib. 7. "non auderem Evangelii ministros qui in illis regionibus aut aliis infidelium provinciis conversantes, si imminente mortis periculo secum Viaticum, occulte tamen, deferrent, condemnare".

2. Pro Gubernatoribus navium Lusitaniae qui singulis annis in Indias orientales navigant, petentibus licentiam deferendi sacramentum Eucharistiae, ne nautae et Rectores sine Viatico decedant. Lecto memoriali et auditis votis Sanctissimus supradictam petitionem omninorejecit; ita quod nec in posterum ullo modo de ea tractetur. S. C. S. O. die 13 Julii 1660.

3. Bened. XIV.Inter omnigenas"pro Incolis Regni Serviae et finitimarum Regionum". "At ubi (sicuti ibidem legitur) Turcarum vis praevalet et iniquitas, sacerdos stolam semper habeat coopertam vestibus; in sacculo seu bursa pixidem recondat quam per funiculos collo appensam in sinu reponat et nunquam solus procedat, sed uno saltem fideli, in defectu Clerici, associetur".

4. Honorius III. in cap.Sanede celebratione Miss. expresse habet de delatione Eucharistiae quod si "in partibus infidelium ob necessitatem S. Viatici permittitur, tamen extra necessitatem permittenda non est, cum hodie Ecclesiastica lege absolute prohibitum sit ut occulte deferatur. Occulte deferre in itinere, nequit moraliter fieri absque irreverentia tanti sacramenti".

5. Verricelli de Apostolicis Missionibus Tit. 8. pag. 136. expendit, "An liceat in novo Orbe Missionariis S. Eucharistiam collo appensam secum in itinere occulte deferre etc. et quidquid sit de veteri disciplina concludit hodie universalis Ecclesiae consuetudine et plurimorum Conciliorum decretis prohibitum est deferre occulte S. Eucharistiam in itinere, nisi pro communicando infirmo, ubi esset timor et periculum infidelium, et dummodo ad infirmum non sit nimis longum iter sed modicum et unius diei".

6. Thomas a Jesu de procur. salut. omnium gentium lib. 7. "non auderem Evangelii ministros qui in illis regionibus aut aliis infidelium provinciis conversantes, si imminente mortis periculo secum Viaticum, occulte tamen, deferrent, condemnare".

Illustrissime ac Reverendissime Domine,

Quandoquidem divino praecepto animarum Rectoribus mandatum sit oves suas agnoscere, easque pascere verbo Dei, sacramentis, atque exemplo bonorum operum, idcirco ii ad personalem in suis Dioecesibus vel Ecclesiis residentiam obligantur; sine qua injunctum sibi officium defungi per se ipsos minime possent. Porro pastoralis residentiae debitum quovis tempore Ecclesia Dei asserere atque urgere non destitit; cujus sollicitudinis luculenta exhibent testimonia non modo veteres canones, sed et sacrosancta Tridentina Synodus Sess. VI. cap. 1. de Refor. et Sess. XXIII. de Ref. cap. 1. ac novissime Summus Pontifex Benedictus XIV. qui Constitutionead Universae Christianae Reipublicae statumedita die 3 Septembris 1746, residentiae obligationem et inculcavit sedulo et disertissime explicavit.

Quod si ubique locorum Pastores animarum pro officii sui ratione continenter in medio gregis vivere oportet, ad id potiori etiam titulo illi tenentur quibus animarum cura demandata est in locis Missionum.Cum enim fideles in Missionibus graviora passim subire cogantur pericula, dum minora ut plurimum iis praesto sunt adjumenta virtutum, peculiari ac praesentissima indigent vigilantia atque ope Pastorum. Haud igitur mirum si sacro Consilio Christiano Nomini Propagando nil fuerit antiquius quam datis etiam Decretis curare ut a se dependentes Episcopi Vicariique Apostolici in suis Missionibus, quoad fieri posset, absque ulla interruptione residerent. Quam quidem in rem eo usque pervenit Sancta Sedes, ut laudatis Praesulibus sub gravissimis poenis prohibuerit, ne Pontificalia munia in aliena Dioecesi vel Districtu etiam de consensu Ordinarii ullo modo peragerent.

At quoniam, hisce non obstantibus, haud raro contingit ut Praelati Missionum inconsulta Sede Apostolica et absque vera necessitate aut causa canonica perlonga suscipiant itinera, ex quo non mediocria commissae illis Missiones pati possunt detrimenta, propterea Eminentissimi ac Reverendissimi Patres Sacrae hujus Congregationis in generalibus comitiis habitis die 21 Januarii hujus anni expedire censuerunt, ut in memoriam revocarentur praedictorum Praesulum canonicae sanctiones circa Pastorum residentiam, nec non Decreta quae circa ejusdem obligationem edita sunt pro locis Missionum, ne quis videlicet in posterum Dioecesim aut Districtum cui praeest vel ad tempus relinquat absque praevia licentia ejusdem S. Congregationis. Quod quidem dum Amplitudini Tuae significo ex mente Eminentissimorum Patrum, Decreta, de quibus supra, addere non praetermitto (Num. 1).

Praeterea Eminentissimi ac Reverendissimi Patres in iisdem generalibus comitiis statuerunt, utuniversis Episcopis, Vicariis, ac Praefectis Apostolicis MissionumQuaestionestransmittantur pro relatione exhibenda Sacrae Congregationi de statu Dioecesium vel Missionum queis praesunt. Cum enim ii omnes qui Missionibus praeficiuntur praedictam relationem statis temporibus subjicere S. Sedi teneantur, voluit Sacrum Consilium ut eam in posterum exigendam curent ad normam 55 Quaestionum quae in adjecto folio continentur (Num. 2), utque in iis praesertim accuratiores se praebeant, quae ad vitam, honestatem ac scientiam sacerdotum referuntur.

Datum Romae ex Aedibus S. Congregationis de Propaganda Fide die 24 Aprilis 1861.

Amplitudinis TuaeAl. C. Barnabo, Praef.R. P. D. Archiepiscopo Dublinensi.

Amplitudinis TuaeAl. C. Barnabo, Praef.

R. P. D. Archiepiscopo Dublinensi.

"Sanctitas Sua decrevit quod Episcopi S. Congregationi de Propaganda Fide subordinati non possint exercere Pontificalia in aliispraeterquam in propriis Ecclesiis, etiamsi esset de consensu Ordinariorum sub poena suspensionis ipso facto incurrendae, ac eidem Pontifici reservatae, dummodo a praefata S. Congregatione non sint in certo loco destinati Vicarii Apostolici, seu Administratores alicajus Ecclesiae deputati".

Similia Decreta prodierunt ab eadem S. Congregatione die 26 Julii 1662 et 17 Julii 1715.

Cum iteratis per S. C. decretis exercitium Pontificalium extra Dioeceses Episcopis ejusdem S. C. assignatas prohiberetur, quaesivit Episcopus Heliopolitanus.

"An dicta decreta intelligenda essent vim suam habereintrafines Europae tantum, an vero extenderentur etiam ad alia loca, per quae transeundum esset, cum ad suas Ecclesias proficisceretur".

"S. Congregatio respondit Decreta prohibentia dictum exercitium Pontificalium extendi ad omnia loca, etiam extra fines Europae".[31]

Eminentissimi ac Reverendissimi Patres S. Consilii Christiano Nom. Propag. attentis expositis contra Episcopos ab eodem S. Consilio dependentes qui cum detrimento suarum Dioecesium eas deserebant ut Romam vel alia loca peterent, statuendum censuerunt.

"Inhibeatur Episcopis S. Congregationi subjectis ne Romam sub quovis praetextu veniant, absque licentia Sacrae Congregationis. Decretum editum Anno 1626 renovarunt".

Decree of the S. Congregation of Propaganda permitting the English Bishops to exercise Pontificalia within the Three Kingdoms.

Ex negligentia Antistitum circa onus residentiae si ubique mala gravissima obvenirent, potissimum id valet quoad regiones, in quibus ob admixtionem infidelium vel haereticorum gravioribus periculisfideles objiciuntur; proinde Episcopis et Vicariis Apostolicis regionum ad quos S. Congregationis de Propaganda Fide sollicitudo extenditur, indictum haud semel fuit, ne extra propriam Dioecesim vel Vicariatum Pontificalia etiam de consensu Ordinariorum exerceant.

Porro cum dubitari haud valeat de studio Episcoporum Angliae in hujusmodi residentiae lege servanda, iidemque postulaverint, ut tenor regulae hujusmodi in suum favorem relaxetur; S. Congregatio de Propaganda Fide in generali conventu habito die 5 Aprilis 1852 attento quod haud raro necessarium vel opportunum admodum existat, ut iidem admitti possint ad Pontificalia exercenda in aliis Angliae ipsius dioecesibus, aliquando etiam in proximis regionibus Hiberniae et Scotiae, censuit supplicandum Sanctissimo pro relaxatione memoratae inhibitionis in favorem Episcoporum Angliae quoad tria regna unita, in quibus proinde de consensu Ordinariorum Pontificalia iidem exercere valeant.

Hanc vero S. Congregationis sententiam Sanctissimo D. N. Pio PP. IX. ab infrascripto Secretario relatam in Aud. diei 6 ejusdem mensis et anni Sanctitas Sua benigne probavit, et juxta propositum tenorem facultates concessit, contrariis quibuscumque haud obstantibus.

In epistola data die 6 Feb. 1862. Eminentissimus Dominus Cardinalis S. Cong. de Prop. Fide Prefectus ad Archiepiscopum Dublinensem scribens declarat facultatem supra memoratam omnibus Hiberniae praesulibus eodem mode ac Angliae episcopis fuisse a Sanctissimo Domino N. Pio IX. concessam.

♰Paulus Cullen.

Back to Index Next