There are two Universities recognized by law in this country. One of these, the University of Dublin, or Trinity College, although it has shown of late years a more liberal spirit towards Catholics than formerly, must always remain essentially Protestant in character, until the way is open for Catholics to be appointed on its governing body—a change, of which there does not appear to be the slightest probability.
As a matter of fact, its governing body, consisting of the provost and senior fellows, areallmembers of the Church as by law established, and, with two exceptions, are Protestant clergymen. The other fellows, and the scholars on the foundation, are likewise Protestants; and this in a city where, of a population of 254,000, only 58,000 are Protestants (of all denominations), and in a country in which only 11.8 per cent. of the inhabitants are members of the Established Church.
It is true that within the last few years some scholarships of small value have been opened for Catholics and Dissenters. Masters of Arts, even such of them as are not Protestants, have votes in the election of members to represent the University in Parliament; but these scholarships are not on the foundation, the holders of them do not belong to the corporation, and no Catholic has any share in the government of the University, nor (with one trifling exception) in its teaching. Trinity College was founded for the purpose (as stated in its original charter) of destroying Catholicity and promoting the ascendancy of the Established Church in Ireland. It has religiously endeavoured to discharge that trust; and, although some of its members have been and are men of liberal and enlarged views, still it continues to the present day the work given it to do by its foundress, Queen Elizabeth. At this moment there is a Protestant bishop in Ireland who was a Catholic till he entered Trinity College; the same can be said of the archdeacon of another diocese, and his two brothers; the female members of the families of these dignitaries still remain good Catholics; and on the list of the fellows, professors, and scholars of the University itself, are the names of several who were baptized in the Catholic faith, and declared themselves Protestants when wishing to become members of the University of Dublin! What wonder, then, that Catholics should be unwillingto leave the chief education of the country in the hands of the Protestant University of Dublin, more especially since it has been observed that a very large proportion of the Catholics who have studied there, cease during their University course to be communicants in the Church to which they still belong by name? What wonder that Catholics should consider it a hardship to be forced, if they wish to get University education near home, to seek it in an institution from whose dignities and management they are excluded, in which an antagonistic creed is always put forward ostentatiously in a position of superiority, while the faith of their fathers, if it be not contemned and scoffed at, is systematically treated with silent indifference, or with supercilious patronage? What wonder that Catholics being declared by Act of Parliament "freemen" in every way equal to their Protestant fellow-countrymen, should be unwilling to continue begging as a favour at the gates of such an institution for the academical honours and distinction to which they are entitled as a right? It is absurd that in the metropolis of a free country, containing inhabitants of various religions, a handful of clergymen of one denomination should pretend to a monopoly of University education; should hold in their hands the keys of knowledge, doling it out as they please, and obliging even those whose faith they denounce as idolatry and superstition, to send their sons to their schools. Would such a system be allowed in any other country? Would a few Catholic priests be allowed, even for one hour, to monopolize the University education of Protestant England?
We need not be surprised, then, that the number of Catholics entering Trinity College has steadily diminished during the last thirty years, and that they now form only six per cent. of the total number of entrances. In the official return contained in the last report of the Census Commissioners, we find that on the 17th May, 1861, of one hundred and forty-seven students resident in Trinity College, only five were Catholics.
In order to remedy, in some measure, this evil, the late Sir Robert Peel founded the Queen's Colleges. But the remedy was ineffectual. These colleges incurred the reprobation of the authorities of the Catholic Church, and, consequently, by far the greater part of Catholics object to these institutions on conscientious grounds, and many of them on political and social grounds also.
According to the last census, there were in Ireland in 1861, ninety-eight classical schools under the management of societies or boards, and two hundred and three private classical schools. The total number of pupils in these schools was 10,346, of whom 5,118, or about one-half, were Catholics. There were also 1,242 Catholics returned as receiving collegiate education on the 17thof May of that year. We have thus a total of 6,360 Catholic youths receiving a superior education in Ireland. Few, if any, of the Catholic institutions to which these pupils belong look with favour on the existing universities. On the other hand, none of these youths ought to be excluded from University education on account of conscientious objections: and yet by far the greater number are practically excluded at present, at least they are excluded from participation in the highest University dignities, and from the management of those seats of learning and centres of intellectual progress, one of which is essentially Protestant, the other is condemned by their Church. Is this justice? is it equality? is it intellectual freedom?
The unfairness of the present system will appear more clearly, if we consider the question of professional education. In the profession of the Law, out of 758 barristers in Ireland in 1861, 216 were returned as Catholics; 674 out of 1,882 attorneys; of 2,358 physicians and surgeons, 761 were Catholics; and 210 out of 419 apothecaries, many of whom hold a medical license. Of 1,065 members of other liberal professions, not ecclesiastics, the Census Commissioners state that 358 belonged to the Catholic religion; and of 267 professors in colleges, and tutors, 141 held the same faith. To these we must add 83 law students, 40 of whom are Catholics; and 329 Catholic medical students out of a total of 954. We have thus 2,729 Catholics out of a total of 7,758 persons engaged in the liberal professions, or aspiring to them.
Let us now see the disabilities under which this large number, more than one-third of the whole, labour, when on conscientious grounds they object, as is generally the case, to existing University arrangements.
With respect to the profession of the Law and to Attorneys, the following arrangement is at present in force by Act of Parliament, or by the resolution of the Benchers.
All graduates of Trinity College or of the Queen's University can be called to the Bar at the end ofthreeyears from the date of their registration as law students; while non-graduates are inadmissible to such call until the expiration offiveyears from such date.
Graduates are obliged to attend onlytwocourses of lectures,eitherat the King's Inns or at Trinity College,or(in the case of students of the Queen's University) at any one of the Provincial Colleges; while non-graduates are required to attendfourcourses, viz.:—two courses at the King's Inns, and two additional courses at Trinity College. Moreover, graduates are required to attendtwelveterms' commons, viz.: six in the King's Inns and six in any Inn in London; while non-graduates are required to attendseventeen, terms' commons, viz.: nine in the King's Inns and eight inEngland. Finally, the fees payable by graduates are less than those imposed upon non-graduates.
With regard to the apprentices of solicitors and attorneys, all matriculated students of Trinity College and of the Queen's Colleges are exempt from the preliminary examination imposed upon all other apprentices who have not been so matriculated. They may further be admitted to the practice of their profession two years earlier than non-matriculated apprentices, and are exempt from one of the courses of lectures appointed by the Benchers for such apprentices.
From this it appears that Catholics, and indeed all who object to the Protestant University and to the Queen's Colleges, are delayed in their course to a profession one or two years longer than the graduates of the favoured institutions, and are obliged to attend additional lectures and to pay extra fees, irrespectively of their proficiency in literature and science, or in law. Nearly one thousand Catholics (930) must submit to these inconveniencies, or must, on the one hand, choose between a University founded to maintain the ascendancy of the Established Church in Ireland, and, on the other hand, institutions condemned by their Church.
With respect to the Medical Profession, every one knows the high value set by practitioners, and by the public, on the title and degree of "Doctor of Medicine". Now, no one can obtain that high distinction in Ireland unless by becoming a member of one of the two Universities recognized by law; and the 329 Catholic medical students must either give up all chance of that honour and professional advantage, or trample under foot their self-respect, if, contrary to their religious principles, they enter one of the institutions which their faith condemns.
As to professors in colleges, and tutors, besides the injustice to the persons themselves, there is no one but must see the injury inflicted on the education of the nation, when more than one-half of the teachers in its superior schools and colleges are obliged to forego the advantages of University education (we ought in their case rather to say, the necessary training for their important office, which can be had only in an University), or to secure it with the fear which nearly all Catholics feel of forfeiting more sacred advantages, of endangering more important interests. And although some persons may deem these fears excessive, still, has any one the right to tamper with these religious opinions? Is it fair or reasonable to place such trammels on men in the pursuit of the highest education? In fine, is it just to oblige parents to choose for their sons either half-educated tutors, or else men whose views may have become unsettled on matters most important, most sacred to their eyes in their children's education—men who have been trained in an institution which Catholics, as a body, reject and repudiate?
The Census Commissioners, in the report referred to, remark: "The high proportion of members of the Established Church receiving intermediate instruction (as compared to Catholics) is due in a great measure to the numerous endowments in connection with that Church, and to the relation existing between many of these endowments and the University of Dublin". Might they not have added, that this disproportion is also due to the fact, that little or no inducements are held out to Catholics to pursue University studies, or rather, that no University career is left open to the large number of Catholics who, on conscientious grounds, object to the Protestant University and to the Queen's Colleges? The following sentences in the Report seem fully to bear us out in this remark: "The very small proportion of Roman Catholic students receiving University instruction requires, perhaps, more explanation, because they are taken from the class of those undergoing intermediate instruction, which has an absolute majority over the Protestants of the same class. If, however, we deduct from the number of Roman Catholics pursuing classical studies those who pass to the College of Maynooth, All Hallows, and several Continental seminaries, to follow up their studies preparatory for the priesthood, the disproportion will appear less, when we take into account that nearly all the candidates for the ministry of the Established Church graduate in the University of Dublin, to which they contribute a very large proportion of its students". It might be asked: Why ought the Catholic students here referred to, be deprived of the advantages of University education, if they wished for them, as they are enjoyed by ecclesiastical students in Belgium, Prussia, and Austria?
The Report then continues: "Taking an average for ten years of the numbers graduating in the University of Dublin and Queen's University, we obtain a representation of the number receiving University instruction yearly in Ireland not very far removed from the truth. That average is 335, or 0.006 per cent. of the entire population. This being so, we regret to say that, as compared with other European countries, Ireland occupies a lower place than several—namely, than Prussia, Austria, or Belgium; the first mentioned of those countries having had, in 1852, 0.028 per cent.; the second, in 1853-4, 0.026; and the last, in 1850, 0.017 per cent. of her population engaged in University studies; so that whatever advantage any one section of the Irish people may seem to have over any other in this respect, much yet remains to be done by all before the entire population of Ireland can take a prominent rank among civilizedcountries in the cultivation of liberal studies"—Report of Census Commissioners, page 60.
The "much which remains to be done" is, we submit, to take off the restrictions on University education which still remain, and to allow Catholics who conscientiously object to the Protestant University and to the Queen's Colleges, to gain University honours and distinctions without violating their religious principles. At present they are excluded, practically, from University education on account of their religious opinions. Let these disabilities be removed, either by placing on an equality with the other Universities the Catholic University, which is founded on the principles they admit, as the others are based on principles antagonistic to them; or else establish one central University of Ireland, an institution which will be, not a teaching, but an examining and graduating body, before which all who desire degrees or other academical honours may equally present themselves, and where every man, no matter under what system he has studied, will find his religious convictions respected, and will be asked not where or how he has learned, but what he knows—a University, which, with some necessary modifications, will be for Irish Catholics, and indeed for all Ireland, what the London University is for the Dissenters of England.
If precedents for either of these plans be asked for, they will be found, for the first, in the Catholic University of Laval, Quebec, chartered by her present Majesty; and for the other, in Belgium, and in the University of Sydney.
(From M. Bouix's "Revue des Sciences Ecclesiastiques".)
1. Should the altar-charts be placed on the altar except at the time of Mass?
2. Should the preacher wear his beretta while preaching?
3. Should the little bell be rung at the moment when Benediction is given with the Blessed Sacrament?
4. Should the thurifer incense the Blessed Sacrament whilst Benediction is being given?
1. It is usual in certain churches not only to leave the altar-charts permanently on the altar, but also to place them on it as an ornament during vespers and other functions, and even to furnish with them altars at which Mass is not said. Now, it is quite certain that whatever specially belongs to the Mass should not be on the altar except during the Holy Sacrifice. TheRubric of the Missal prescribes that the altar-charts should be prepared before Mass, and does not suppose that they remain permanently on the altar. Except at Mass time, and even during the celebration of the divine office, the altar ought to remain covered. In theCaeremoniale Episcop., l. 2, c. 1, n. 13, we read that the acolytes should uncover the altar before the incensation at theMagnificat. "Interim duo acolyti procedunt ad altare, elevantes hinc inde anteriorem partem superioris tobalae, seu veli super altare positi, illamque conduplicant usque ad medium". Nothing is more opposed to the spirit of liturgical rules than objects for which there is no use. Altar-charts are not a decoration, but are made to serve a purpose; therefore they should be displayed when they are wanted. Care should also be taken that they be legible, and not, as sometimes happens, rather pictures than anything else.
2. The Rubric of theCaeremon. Episcop.is clear on this point: "Mox surgit, et capite coöperto incipit sermonem."—(l. 1, c. 22, n. 3). According to the Rubric of the Missal, the preacher uncovers his head as often as he pronounces the holy names of Jesus and Mary, or of the saint whose feast is being celebrated. In order not to do this too often, he should avoid a too frequent mention of their names. "Si SS. nominum Jesu uel Mariæ fiat mentio", says Lohner (Instr. Pract., t. 1., p. 50), "caput discoöperire debet (concionator); si tamen saepe sint repetenda, utatur potius nomine Christi, Redemptoris, Dominæ nostrae, Cœli Reginæ, aut similibus".
We may remark, however, that this regulation of the Rubric is an exception to the general rule. The general rule is, that ecclesiastics in church or choir are never covered except when seated, unless those who,paramentis induti, move from place to place without passing before the clergy. A priest who goes from the sacristy to the choir, or to any other part of the church, if he do not wear at least the stole, should not wear his beretta. Much less should he wear the beretta if he be not in choir habit.
3. No author speaks of this usage. There appears, therefore, no reason why it should be introduced. We would not venture to say that it ought to be suppressed. However, it appears more becoming to reserve for Mass the use of the small bell, and to ring during Benediction the large bells of the church, as is the custom in Rome.
4. During Benediction the thurifer may incense the Blessed Sacrament on his knees, as at High Mass; but it is better to omit such incensation. The first of these assertions rests upon various decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Rites; the second upon authority, especially that of Gardellini.
1st Decree.—"Cum non una sit auctorum sententia, nec eadem Ecclesiae praxis quoad incensationem SS. Sacramenti dum populo cum ipso impertitur benedictio, R. P. Fr. Paschalis a Platea Branculi sacerdos ordinis minorum ... S. R. C. sequentia dubia enodanda proposuit, nimirum: 1. Num utraque auctorum sententia, videlicet eorum qui affirmant et eorum qui denegant talem thurificationem adhibendam tuto teneri possit? 2.... 3. Quatenus respondeatur in sensu denegantium, an usus, sive consuetudo incensandi, ubi viget, sit de medio tollendus? Respons.Servetur Rituale Romanum"—(Dec. 11 Sept., 1847, No. 5105, q. 1, d. 3).
2nd Decree.—"Utrum conveniens sit, quod cæremoniarius vel thuriferarius incenset SS. Eucharistiæ Sacramentum cum populo benedictio impertitur, uti fit in elevatione SS. Sacramenti in Missa solemni? Respons.Non praescribi" (Decret. 11 Sept., 1847, No. 5111, q. 9).
The Rubric of the Ritual referred to in the first decree does not speak of this incensation. In the second the usage appears to be tolerated, but is not prescribed.
Gardellini, § xxxi., No. 23, thus speaks:
"Heic loci altera se offert quæstio, num scilicet thuriferarius, dum sacerdos benedicit populum debeat, incensare Sacramentum? Silentium, quod tenent Caeremoniale, Rituale, Instructio clementina, et auctores fere omnes, qui caeteroquin nihil omiserunt de iis, quae in sacra hac actione servanda sunt, plane suadet hanc incensationem esse omittendam. Nihilominus Cavalerius ... et Tetamus, qui eum sequitur ... innixi quodam decreto ... existimant faciendam esse, vel saltem in arbitrio relinqui. Videtur tamen magis congruere contrariam sententiam consentaneam silentio Caeremonialis, Ritualis, et Instructionis. Cur enim in his, licet enumerentur ritus et caeremoniae ommnes servandae, de hac una ne verbum quidem fit? Non alia est ratio, nisi quia locum habere nequit. Si quaeris: cur? Dicam: quia dignior id est sacerdos, jam Sacramentum thurificavit, nec inferior debet postea thurificationem iterare. Dum benedicitur populus supplet vices incensi bonus adorationis odor. Nec me commovent assertum decretum et Missalis rubrica. Nam ad illud quod attinet, jam supra notavi decretum illud non reperiri in regestis S. R. C. ac penitus ignorari a qua congregatione vel cujus auctoritate datum fuerit; et forte nihil aliud est, nisi privatum responsum ad consultationem factam alicui Rubricarum perito, qui potius variam ecclesiarum consuetudinem attendens, quam rationum vim, respondit: Servari posse alterutram. Quod vero spectat rubricam Missalis, longe diversa militat ratio. Ideo enim rubrica praescribit in Missa solemni:Thuriferarius genuflexus in cornu epistolae ter incensat Hostiam, cum elevatur, et similiter calicem, posito incenso in thuribulo absque benedictione, tum quia unica haec est incensatio, quae ad Sacramentum adolendum fit in Missa, solemni, tum quia alius non est thuriferario dignior, qui eo fungatur munere; namsacerdos celebrat, diaconus ei assistit, subdiaconus impeditus est patena, cæremoniarius invigilat ut quisque suo fungatur officio. Id adeo verum est, ut in Missa defunctorum cum dignior thuriferario subdiaconus non sit impeditus, Sacramentum incensat jubente rubrica:Subdiaconus non tenet patenam post celebrantem, sed tempore elevationis Sacramenti in cornu epistolae illud incensat. Contra vero cum benedicendus est populus cum Sacramento, curnam iteranda erit thurificatio per acolythum, si jam ab omnium in ea actione ministrantium dignissimo, celebrante scilicet, peracta fuerat? Si has rationes parvi fieri oportere existimas, haud contemnendum censeas librorum ritualium silentium, qui certe hanc thurificationem demandassent, quemadmodum jusserunt fieri ad hymni cantum ante orationem. Haec dixi, ne quid magis congruum mihi videtur, praeterirem: caeterum absit ut velim turbas movere, ac damnare consuetudinem, quae licet minus conveniat, ritus tamen substantiam non laedit. Cum autem eadem consuetudo in bene multis ecclesiis obtineat, difficillimum esset eamdem penitus eliminare".
"Heic loci altera se offert quæstio, num scilicet thuriferarius, dum sacerdos benedicit populum debeat, incensare Sacramentum? Silentium, quod tenent Caeremoniale, Rituale, Instructio clementina, et auctores fere omnes, qui caeteroquin nihil omiserunt de iis, quae in sacra hac actione servanda sunt, plane suadet hanc incensationem esse omittendam. Nihilominus Cavalerius ... et Tetamus, qui eum sequitur ... innixi quodam decreto ... existimant faciendam esse, vel saltem in arbitrio relinqui. Videtur tamen magis congruere contrariam sententiam consentaneam silentio Caeremonialis, Ritualis, et Instructionis. Cur enim in his, licet enumerentur ritus et caeremoniae ommnes servandae, de hac una ne verbum quidem fit? Non alia est ratio, nisi quia locum habere nequit. Si quaeris: cur? Dicam: quia dignior id est sacerdos, jam Sacramentum thurificavit, nec inferior debet postea thurificationem iterare. Dum benedicitur populus supplet vices incensi bonus adorationis odor. Nec me commovent assertum decretum et Missalis rubrica. Nam ad illud quod attinet, jam supra notavi decretum illud non reperiri in regestis S. R. C. ac penitus ignorari a qua congregatione vel cujus auctoritate datum fuerit; et forte nihil aliud est, nisi privatum responsum ad consultationem factam alicui Rubricarum perito, qui potius variam ecclesiarum consuetudinem attendens, quam rationum vim, respondit: Servari posse alterutram. Quod vero spectat rubricam Missalis, longe diversa militat ratio. Ideo enim rubrica praescribit in Missa solemni:Thuriferarius genuflexus in cornu epistolae ter incensat Hostiam, cum elevatur, et similiter calicem, posito incenso in thuribulo absque benedictione, tum quia unica haec est incensatio, quae ad Sacramentum adolendum fit in Missa, solemni, tum quia alius non est thuriferario dignior, qui eo fungatur munere; namsacerdos celebrat, diaconus ei assistit, subdiaconus impeditus est patena, cæremoniarius invigilat ut quisque suo fungatur officio. Id adeo verum est, ut in Missa defunctorum cum dignior thuriferario subdiaconus non sit impeditus, Sacramentum incensat jubente rubrica:Subdiaconus non tenet patenam post celebrantem, sed tempore elevationis Sacramenti in cornu epistolae illud incensat. Contra vero cum benedicendus est populus cum Sacramento, curnam iteranda erit thurificatio per acolythum, si jam ab omnium in ea actione ministrantium dignissimo, celebrante scilicet, peracta fuerat? Si has rationes parvi fieri oportere existimas, haud contemnendum censeas librorum ritualium silentium, qui certe hanc thurificationem demandassent, quemadmodum jusserunt fieri ad hymni cantum ante orationem. Haec dixi, ne quid magis congruum mihi videtur, praeterirem: caeterum absit ut velim turbas movere, ac damnare consuetudinem, quae licet minus conveniat, ritus tamen substantiam non laedit. Cum autem eadem consuetudo in bene multis ecclesiis obtineat, difficillimum esset eamdem penitus eliminare".
Venerabilis Frater Salutem et Apostolicam Benedictionem. Tuas libenter accepimus Litteras die 7 proxime elapsi mensis Octobris datas, ut Nos certiores faceres de Conventu in ista Monacensi civitate proximo mense Septembri a nonnullis Germaniae Theologis, doctisque catholicis viris habito de variis argumentis, quae ad theologicas praesertim ac philosophicas tradendas disciplinas pertinent. Ex Litteris Tibi Nostro jussu scriptis a Venerabili Fratre Mattheo Archiepiscopo Neocaesariensi, Nostro et Apostolicae hujus sedis apud istam Regiam Aulam Nuntio, vel facile noscere potuisti, Venerabilis Frater, quibus Nos sensibus affecti fuerimus, ubi primum de hoc proposito Conventu nuntium accepimus, et postquam agnovimus quomodo commemorati Theologi et viri ad hujusmodi Conventum invitati et congregati fuere. Nihil certe dubitare volebamus de laudabili fine, quo hujus Conventus auctores fautoresque permoti fuere, ut scilicet omnes Catholici viri doctrina praestantes, collatis consiliis conjunctisque viribus, germanam catholicae Ecclesiae scientiam promoverent, eamque a nefariis ac perniciosissimis tot adversariorum opinionibus conatibusque vindicarent ac defenderent. Sed in hac sublimi Principis Apostolorum Cathedra licet immerentes collocati asperrimis hisce temporibus, quibus sacrorum Antistitum auctoritas, si unquam alias, ad unitatem et integritatem catholicae doctrinae custodiendam, vel maxime est necessaria, et ab omnibus sarta tecta servari debet, non potuimus non vehementer mirari videntes memorati Conventus invitationem privato nomine factam et promulgatam, quin ullo modo intercederet impulsus, auctoritas et missio ecelesiasticae potestatis, ad quam proprio ac nativo jure unice pertinet advigilare ac dirigere theologicarum praesertim rerum doctrinam. Quae sane res, ut optime noscis, omnino nova ac prorsus inusitata in Ecclesia est. Atque iccirco voluimus, Te, Venerabilis Frater, noscere hanc Nostram fuisse sententiam, ut cum a Te, tum ab aliis Venerabilibus Fratribus Sacrorum in Germania antistitibus probe judicari posset de scopo per Conventus programma enuntiato, si nempe talis esset, ut veram Ecclesiae utilitatem afferret. Eodem autem tempore certi eramus, Te, Venerabilis Frater, pro pastorali Tua sollicitudine ac zelo omnia consilia et studia esse adhibiturum, ne in eodem Conventu tum catholicae fidei ac doctrinae integritas, tum obedientia, quam omnes cujusque classis et conditionis catholici homines Ecclesiae auctoritati ac magisterio praestare omnino debent, vel minimum detrimentum caperent. Ac dissimulare non possumus, non levibus Nos angustiisaffectos fuisse, quandoquidem verebamur, ne hujusmodi Conventu sine ecclesiastica auctoritate congregato exemplum praeberetur sensim usurpandi aliquid ex jure ecclesiastici regiminis et authentici magisterii, quod divina institutione proprium est Romano Pontifici, et Episcopis in unione et consensione cum ipso S. Petri Successore, atque ita, ecclesiastico ordine perturbato aliquando unitas et obedientia fidei apud aliquos labefactaretur. Atque etiam timebamus, ne in ipso Conventu quaedam enunciarentur ac tenerentur opiniones et placita, quae in vulgus praesertim emissa et catholicae doctrinae puritatem et debitam subjectionem in periculum ac discrimen vocarent. Summo enim animi Nostri dolore recordabamur, Venerabilis Frater, hanc Apostolicam Sedem pro gravissimi sui muneris officio debuisse ultimis hisce temporibus censura notare ac prohibere nonnullorum Germaniae Scriptorum opera, qui cum nescirent decedere ab aliquo principio, seu methodo falsae scientiae, aut hodiernae fallacis philosophiae, praeter voluntatem, uti confidimus, inducti fuere ad proferendas ac docendas doctrinas dissentientes a vero nonnullorum sanctissimae fidei nostrae dogmatum sensu et interpretatione, quique errores ab Ecclesia jam damnatos e tenebris excitarunt, et propriam divinae revelationis et fidei indolem et naturam in alienum omnino sensum explicaverunt. Noscebamus etiam, Venerabilis Frater, nonnullos ex catholicis, qui severioribus disciplinis excolendis operam navant, humani ingenii viribus nimium fidentes, errorum periculis haud fuisse absterritos, ne in asserenda fallaci et minime sincera scientiae libertate abriperentur ultra limites, quos praetergredi non sinit obedientia debita erga magisterium Ecclesiae ad totius revelatae veritatis integritatem servandam divinitus institutum. Ex quo evenit, ut hujusmodi catholici misere decepti et iis saepe consentiant, qui contra hujus Apostolicae Sedis ac Nostrarum Congregationum decreta declamant ac blaterant, ea liberum scientiae progressum impedire, et periculo se exponunt sacra illa frangendi obedientiae vincula, quibus ex Dei voluntate eidem Apostolicae huic obstringuntur Sedi, quae a Deo ipso veritatis magistra et vindex fuit constituta. Neque ignorabamus, in Germania etiam falsam invaluisse opinionem adversus veterem scholam, et adversus doctrinam summorum illorum Doctorum, quos propter admirabilem eorum sapientiam et vitae sanctitatem universalis veneratur Ecclesia. Qua falsa opinione ipsius Ecclesiae auctoritas in discrimen vocatur, quandoquidem ipsa Ecclesia non solum per tot continentia saecula permisit, ut ex eorumdem Doctorum methodo, et ex principiis communi omnium catholicarum scholarum consensu sancitis theologica excoleretur scientia, verum etiam saepissime summis laudibus theologicam eorum doctrinam extulit, illamque veluti fortissimum fidei propugnaculum et formidanda contra suos inimicos arma vehementer commendavit. Haec sane omnia pro gravissimi supremi Nostri Apostolici ministerii munere, ac pro singulari illo amore, quo omnes Germaniae catholicos carissimam Dominici gregis partem prosequimur, Nostrum sollicitabant et angebant animum tot aliis pressum angustiis, ubi, accepto memorati Conventus nuntio, res supra expositas Tibi significandas curavimus. Postquamvero per brevissimum nuntium ad Nos relatum fuit, Te Venerabilis Frater, hujusce Conventus auctorum precibus annuentem tribuisse veniam celebrandi eumdem Conventum, ac sacrum solemni ritu peregisse, et consultationes in eodem Conventu juxta catholicae Ecclesiae doctrinam habitas fuisse, et postquam ipsius Conventus viri per eumdem nuntium Apostolicam Nostram imploraverunt Benedictionem, nulla interposita mora, piis illorum votis obsecundavimus, Summa vero anxietate Tuas expectabamus Litteras, ut a Te, Venerabilis Frater, accuratissime noscere possemus ea omnia, quae ad eumdem Conventum quovis modo possent pertinere. Nunc autem cum a Te acceperimus, quae scire vel maxime cupiebamus, ea spe nitimur fore, ut hujusmodi negotium, quemadmodum asseris, Deo auxiliante, in majorem catholicae in Germania Ecclesiae utilitatem cedat. Equidem cum omnes ejusdem Conventus viri, veluti scribis, asseruerint, scientiarum progressum, et felicem exitum in devitandis ac refutandis miserrimae nostrae aetatis erroribus omnino pendere ab intima erga veritates revelatas adhaesione, quas catholica docet Ecclesia, ipsi noverunt ac professi sunt illam veritatem, quam veri catholici scientiis excolendis et evolvendis dediti semper tenuere ac tradiderunt. Atque hac veritate innixi potuerunt ipsi sapientes ac veri catholici viri scientias easdem tuto excolere, explanare, easque utiles certasque reddere. Quod quidem obtineri non potest, si humanae rationis lumen finibus circumscriptum eas quoque veritates investigando, quas propriis viribus et facultatibus assequi potest, non veneretur maxime, ut par est, infallibile et increatum Divini intellectus lumen, quod in christiana revelatione undique mirifice elucet. Quamvis enim naturales illae disciplinae suis propriis ratione cognitis principiis nitantur, catholici tamen earum cultores divinam revelationem veluti rectricem stellam prae oculis habeant oportet, qua praelucente sibi a syrtibus et erroribus caveant, ubi in suis investigationibus et commentationibus animadvertant, posse se illis adduci, ut saepissime accidit, ad ea proferenda, quae plus minusve adversentur infallibili rerum veritati, quae a Deo revelatae fuere. Hinc dubitare nolumus, quin ipsius Conventus viri commemoratam veritatem noscentes ac profitentes, uno eodemque tempore plane rejicere ac reprobare voluerint recentem illam ac praeposteram philosophandi rationem, quae etiamsi divinam revelationem veluti historicum factum admittat, tamen ineffabiles veritates ab ipsa divina revelatione propositas humanae rationis investigationibus supponit, perinde ac si illae veritates rationi subjectae essent vel ratio suis viribus et principiis posset consequi intelligentiam et scientiam omnium supernarum sanctissimae fidei nostrae veritatum et mysteriorum, quae ita supra humanam rationem sunt, ut haec nunquam effici possit idonea ad illa suis viribus et ex naturalibus suis principiis intelligenda aut demonstranda. Ejusdem vero Conventus viros debitis prosequimur laudibus, proptereaquod rejicientes, uti existimamus, falsam inter philosophum et philosophiam distinctionem, de qua in aliis Nostris Litteris ad Te scriptis loquuti sumus, noverunt et asseruerunt, omnes catholicos in doctis suis commentationibus debere ex conscientia dogmaticis infallibilis catholicae Ecclesiae obediredecretis. Dum vero debitas illis deferimus laudes, quod professi sint veritatem, quae ex catholicae fidei obligatione necessario oritur, persuadere Nobis volumus, noluisse obligationem, qua catholici Magistri ac Scriptores omnino adstringuntur, coarctare in iis tantum, quae ab infallibili Ecclesiae judicio veluti fidei dogmata ab omnibus credenda proponuntur. Atque etiam Nobis persuademus, ipsos noluisse declarare, perfectam illam erga revelatas veritates adhaesionem, quam agnoverunt necessariam omnino esse ad verum scientiarum progressum assequendum et ad errores confutandos, obtineri posse, si dumtaxat Dogmatibus ab Ecclesia expresse definitis fides et obsequium adhibeatur. Namque etiamsi ageretur de illa subjectione, quae fidei divinae actu est praestanda, limitanda tamen non esset ad ea, quae expressis, oecumenicorum Conciliorum aut Romanorum Pontificum, hujusque Apostolicae Sedis decretis definita sunt, sed ad ea quoque extendenda quae ordinario totius Ecclesiae per orbem dispersae magisterio tanquam divinitus revelata traduntur, ideoque universali et constanti consensu a catholicis Theologis ad fidem pertinere retinentur. Sed cum agatur de illa subjectione, qua ex conscientia ii omnes catholici obstringuntur, qui in contemplatrices scientias incumbunt, ut novas suis scriptis Ecclesiae afferant utilitates, iccirco ejusdem Conventus viri recognoscere debent, sapientibus catholicis haud satis esse, ut praefata Ecclesiae dogmata recipiant ac venerentur, verum etiam opus esse, ut se subjiciant tum decisionibus, quae ad doctrinam pertinentes a Pontificiis Congregationibus proferuntur, tum iis doctrinae capitibus, quae communi et constanti Catholicorum consensu retinentur, ut theologicae veritates et conclusiones ita certae, ut opiniones eisdem doctrinae capitibus adversae quamquam haereticae dici nequeant, tamen aliam theologicam merentur censuram. Itaque haud existimamus viros, qui commemorato Monacensi interfuere Conventui, ullo modo potuisse aut voluisse obstare doctrinae nuper expositae quae ex verae theologiae principiis in Ecclesia retinetur, quin immo ea fiducia sustentamur fore, ut ipsi in severioribus excolendis disciplinis velint ad enunciatae doctrinae normam se diligenter conformare. Quae nostra fiducia praesertim nititur iis Litteris, quas per Te, Venerabilis Frater, Nobis miserunt. Si quidem eisdem Litteris cum summa animi Nostri consolatione ipsi profitentur, sibi in cogendo Conventu mentem nunquam fuisse vel minimam sibi arrogare auctoritatem, quae ad Ecclesiam omnino pertinet, ac simul testantur, noluisse, eumdem dimittere Conventum, quin primum declararent summam observantiam, obedientiam, ac filialem pietatem, qua Nos et hanc Petri cathedram catholicae unitatis centrum prosequuntur. Cum igitur hisce sensibus supremam Nostram et Apostolicae hujus sedis potestatem auctoritatemque ipsi recognoscant, ac simul intelligant, gravissimum officium Nobis ab ipso Christo Domino commissum regendi ac moderandi universam suam Ecclesiam, ac pascendi omnem suum gregem salutaris doctrinae pascuis, et continenter advigilandi, ne sanctissima fides ejusque doctrina ullum unquam detrimentum patiatur, dubitare non possumus, quin ipsi severioribus disciplinis excolendis, tradendis sanaeque doctrinae tuendaeoperam navantes uno eodemque tempore agnoscant se debere et religiose exsequi regulas ab ecclesia semper servatas, et obedire omnibus decretis, quae circa doctrinam a Suprema Nostra Pontificia auctoritate eduntur. Haec autem omnia Tibi communicamus, ac summopere optamus, ut ea iis omnibus significes viris, qui in memorato Conventu fuere, dum, si opportunum esse censuerimus, haud omittemus alia Tibi et Venerabilibus Fratribus Germaniae Sacrorum Antistitibus hac super re significare, postquam Tuam et eorumdem Antistitum sententiam intellexerimus de hujusmodi Conventuum opportunitate. Demum pastoralem Tuam sollicitudinem ac vigilantiam iterum vehementer excitamus, ut una cum aliis Venerabilibus Fratribus Sacrorum in Germania Antistitibus, curas omnes cogitationesque in tuendam et propagandam sanam doctrinam assidue conferas. Neque omittas omnibus inculcare, ut profanes omnes novitates diligenter devitent, neque ab illis se decipi unquam patiantur, qui falsam scientiae libertatem, ejusque non solum verum profectum, sed etiam errores tamquam progressus impudenter jactant. Atque pari studio et contentione ne desinas omnes hortari, ut maxima cura et industria in veram christianam et catholicam sapientiam incumbant, atque, uti par est, in summo pretio habeant veros solidosque scientiae progressus, qui, sanctissima ac divina fide duce et magistra, in catholicis scholis habiti fuerunt, utque theologicas praesertim disciplines excolant secundum principia et constantes doctrines, quibus unanimiter innixi sapientissimi Doctores immortalem sibi nominis laudem, et maximam Ecclesiae et scientiae utilitatem ac splendorem pepererunt. Hoc sane mode catholici viri in scientiis excolendis poterunt, Deo auxiliante, magis in dies quantum homini fas est, noscere, evolvere et explanare veritatum thesaurum, quas in naturae et gratiae operibus Deus posuit, ut homo postquam illas rationis et fidei lumine noverit, suamque vitam ad eas sedulo conformaverit, possit in aeternae gloriae claritate summam veritatem, Deum scilicet, sine ullo velamine intueri, Eoque felicissime in aeternum perfrui et gaudere. Hanc autem occasionem libentissimo animo amplectimur, ut denuo testemur et confirmemus praecipuam Nostram in Te caritatem. Cujus quoque pignus esse volumus Apostolicam Benedictionem quam effuse cordis affectu Tibi ipsi, Venerabilis frater, et gregi tuae curae commisso peramanter impertimus.
Datum Romae apud Sanctum-Petrum die 21 decembris anno 1863, Pontificatus Nostri anno decimoctavo.
PIUS PP. IX.
I. Various decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences declare that more Plenary Indulgences than one may be gained by the same person on the same day, provided that the conditions prescribed by the Apostolical Indults be complied with.A decree of 29th February, 1864, supplies further important information on this subject. It lays down that the Indulgences alluded to above are not only the current Indulgences of Feasts, but also the Indulgences which any of the faithful may gain, once a week, or once a month, on a day fixed by himself. When the visitation of a church or a chapel is among the conditions prescribed in order to gain a Plenary Indulgence, the number of visits paid to the church must be the same as that of the indulgences to be gained.
The decree runs as follows:
Decretum.—Congregationis S. Benedicti in Gallia.In generalibus Comitiis Sacrae hujus Indulgentiarum Congregationis habitis die 29 Februarii, 1864, sequentia dubia per Joannem Baptistam Nicolas Monachum Congregationis Gallicae Sancti Benedicti proposita fuere.1. Cum ex diversis Decretis S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum jam liceat plures Plenarias Indulgentias eadem die lucrari, solutis scilicet conditionibus, quaeritur, an dictum Decretum respiciat solas Indulgentias in una die occurrentes propter festivitatem, vel potius etiam illas, quas unusquisque ob suam devotionem tali per hebdomadam aut mensem diei adfixerit?2. Qui Decreto ipso uti voluerit, an teneatur Ecclesiam vel publicum Oratorium visitare (quando nempe requiritur talis visitatio) totidem vicibus, quod sunt Indulgentiae lucrifaciendae?Et quatenus Affirmative,3. An Sufficiat, ut in una, eademque Ecclesia tot preces, seu visitationes repetantur, quot sunt Indulgentiae lucrandae quin de Ecclesia post quamlibet visitationem quis egrediatur, et denuo in eam ingrediatur?Hisce itaque ab Eminentissimis Patribus mature discussis, Votisque Consultorum perpensis, respondendum esse statuerunt Ad Primum,affirmative; ad Secundum,affirmative; ad Tertiumnegative.Datum Romae ex Secretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum die 29 Februarii 1864.
Decretum.—Congregationis S. Benedicti in Gallia.In generalibus Comitiis Sacrae hujus Indulgentiarum Congregationis habitis die 29 Februarii, 1864, sequentia dubia per Joannem Baptistam Nicolas Monachum Congregationis Gallicae Sancti Benedicti proposita fuere.
1. Cum ex diversis Decretis S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum jam liceat plures Plenarias Indulgentias eadem die lucrari, solutis scilicet conditionibus, quaeritur, an dictum Decretum respiciat solas Indulgentias in una die occurrentes propter festivitatem, vel potius etiam illas, quas unusquisque ob suam devotionem tali per hebdomadam aut mensem diei adfixerit?
2. Qui Decreto ipso uti voluerit, an teneatur Ecclesiam vel publicum Oratorium visitare (quando nempe requiritur talis visitatio) totidem vicibus, quod sunt Indulgentiae lucrifaciendae?
Et quatenus Affirmative,
3. An Sufficiat, ut in una, eademque Ecclesia tot preces, seu visitationes repetantur, quot sunt Indulgentiae lucrandae quin de Ecclesia post quamlibet visitationem quis egrediatur, et denuo in eam ingrediatur?
Hisce itaque ab Eminentissimis Patribus mature discussis, Votisque Consultorum perpensis, respondendum esse statuerunt Ad Primum,affirmative; ad Secundum,affirmative; ad Tertiumnegative.
Datum Romae ex Secretaria S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum die 29 Februarii 1864.
F. Antonius Maria Card. Panebianco Praefectus.A. Colombo Secretarius.
II. In order to gain the indulgence of the privileged altar, it is required to say aRequiemMass with black vestments as often as the Rubrics permit. Sometimes this cannot be done; for example, during Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament, or when the Mass is to be said in a church where the station is held, or where some Feast is being celebrated. No account of such days having been taken in the General Decrees, the doubt was raised whether in such cases the indulgence of the privileged altar could be gained without saying aRequiemMass. The following General Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, dated April 11, 1864, settles the point:
Decretum.—Urbis et Orbis.Quamplures Romani Cleri Sacerdotes, ac praesertim Animarum Curatores dubium huic Sacrae Congregationi Indulgentiis Sacrisque Reliquiis praepositae enodandum proposuerunt: Utrum, scilicet, Sacerdos, celebrans in Altari Privilegiato legendo Missam de Festo Semiduplici, Simplici, Votivam, vel de Feria non privilegiata sive ratione expositionis Sanctissimi Sacramenti, sive Stationis Ecclesiae, vel alterius Solemnitatis, aut ex rationabili motivo fruatur privilegio ac si legeret Missam de Requie per Rubricas eo dic permissam?Sacra itaque Congregatio, quae habita fuit apud Vaticanas aedes die 29 Februarii, 1864, auditis Consultorum Votis, respondendum esse duxitAffirmative, deletis tamen verbis"aut ex rationabili motivo"et facto verbo cum Sanctissimo. Facta insuper per me infrascriptum ejusdem S. Congregationis Secretarium Sanctissimo Domino nostro relatione in Audientia diei 11 Aprilis ejusdem anni Sanctitas Sua Eminentissimorum Patrum sententiam benigne confirmavit.Datum Romae ex Secretaria ipsius S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum die 11 Aprilis, 1864.
Decretum.—Urbis et Orbis.Quamplures Romani Cleri Sacerdotes, ac praesertim Animarum Curatores dubium huic Sacrae Congregationi Indulgentiis Sacrisque Reliquiis praepositae enodandum proposuerunt: Utrum, scilicet, Sacerdos, celebrans in Altari Privilegiato legendo Missam de Festo Semiduplici, Simplici, Votivam, vel de Feria non privilegiata sive ratione expositionis Sanctissimi Sacramenti, sive Stationis Ecclesiae, vel alterius Solemnitatis, aut ex rationabili motivo fruatur privilegio ac si legeret Missam de Requie per Rubricas eo dic permissam?
Sacra itaque Congregatio, quae habita fuit apud Vaticanas aedes die 29 Februarii, 1864, auditis Consultorum Votis, respondendum esse duxitAffirmative, deletis tamen verbis"aut ex rationabili motivo"et facto verbo cum Sanctissimo. Facta insuper per me infrascriptum ejusdem S. Congregationis Secretarium Sanctissimo Domino nostro relatione in Audientia diei 11 Aprilis ejusdem anni Sanctitas Sua Eminentissimorum Patrum sententiam benigne confirmavit.
Datum Romae ex Secretaria ipsius S. Congregationis Indulgentiarum die 11 Aprilis, 1864.
F. Antonius Maria Card. PanebiancoPraefectus.A. Colombo Secretarius.
The following letter will be read with interest by those who desire to be accurately acquainted with the present legislation of the Church in regard to secret societies. The bulls of Clement XII., Benedict XIV., Pius VII., and Leo XII., against freemasons, carbonari, and other similar associations, are well known. However, controversies have arisen as to the persons who incur the censures enacted in those bulls. Some have asserted that members of a secret society contract no censure unless the object or tendency of the society be both to undermine the authority of civil government, and to destroy religion, and that at the same time the members of the society be bound by oath to secrecy.
The decision of the Holy Office, confirmed by his present Holiness, puts an end to all doubts on the question, and it is now decided that all members of secret societies that are directedeitheragainst the state,oragainst religion, whether bound by oath or not, incur the penalties enacted against freemasons, etc., in the Papal constitutions:
ILLME. ET REVME. DNE.Plura ad Sanctam Sedem delata sunt circa societatem quae appellatur Fratrum Feniorum, nec non circa aliam a Sancto Patritio nuncupatam, eaque supremæ Congregationi Universalis Inquisitionis submissa fuere, ut quid de illis sentiendum esset declararetur.Porro Sanctissimus Dominus Noster Pius IX. audito Eminentissimorum Inquisitorum suffragio, Amplitudini tuae notificandum mandavit Decretum Feriae IV., 5. Augusti, 1846, quod sic se habet: "Societates occultae de quibus in Pontificiis Constitutionibus sermo est, eae omnes intelliguntur quae adversus Ecclesiam vel gubernium sibi aliquid proponunt, exigant vel non exigant juramentum de secreto servando". Voluit praeterea Sanctitas sua ut Tibi subjungeretur recurrendum esse ad Sanctam Sedem, et quidem omnibus adamussim expositis, si quae forte difficultates in applicatione praedicti Decreti quod alterutram e memoratis societatibus inveniantur.Precor Deum ut Te diu sospitem et incolumem servet. Romae ex Aedibus Sacrae Congregationis de Propaganda Fide die 7 Junii, 1864.Amplitudinis TuaeAd officia paratissimus,Al. C. Barnabo, Praef.H. Capalti, Secretarius.R. P. D. Paulo Cullen,Archiepiscopo Dubliniensi.
ILLME. ET REVME. DNE.
Plura ad Sanctam Sedem delata sunt circa societatem quae appellatur Fratrum Feniorum, nec non circa aliam a Sancto Patritio nuncupatam, eaque supremæ Congregationi Universalis Inquisitionis submissa fuere, ut quid de illis sentiendum esset declararetur.
Porro Sanctissimus Dominus Noster Pius IX. audito Eminentissimorum Inquisitorum suffragio, Amplitudini tuae notificandum mandavit Decretum Feriae IV., 5. Augusti, 1846, quod sic se habet: "Societates occultae de quibus in Pontificiis Constitutionibus sermo est, eae omnes intelliguntur quae adversus Ecclesiam vel gubernium sibi aliquid proponunt, exigant vel non exigant juramentum de secreto servando". Voluit praeterea Sanctitas sua ut Tibi subjungeretur recurrendum esse ad Sanctam Sedem, et quidem omnibus adamussim expositis, si quae forte difficultates in applicatione praedicti Decreti quod alterutram e memoratis societatibus inveniantur.
Precor Deum ut Te diu sospitem et incolumem servet. Romae ex Aedibus Sacrae Congregationis de Propaganda Fide die 7 Junii, 1864.
Amplitudinis Tuae
Ad officia paratissimus,Al. C. Barnabo, Praef.H. Capalti, Secretarius.
R. P. D. Paulo Cullen,Archiepiscopo Dubliniensi.
Reverendissimus Dominus Patritius Durcan Episcopus Achadensis in Hibernia exponens in sibi concredita Dioecesi a tempore immemorabili viguisse cultum Sanctae Attractae Virginis inter Sancti Patritii alumnas adnumeratae, a Sanctissimo Domino Nostro PIO PAPA IX. humillime postulavit ut, die XI. Augusti Sanctae Attractae recurrente memoria, a Clero Achadensi in Officio et Missa de communi Virginum recitari valeant cum oratione Lectiones secundi nocturni propriae, uti supra adnotantur, ex probatis legitimisque fontibus desumptae. Sanctitas porro Sua, referente subscripto Sacrorum Rituum Congregationis Secretario precibus clementer annuere dignata est; dummodo Festum Sanctae Attractae instituatur ritu duplici minori, Rubricae serventur, ac interim Episcopus Orator efficaci adhibita pastorali sollicitudine Fideles cohortari et excitare curet ad instaurandam in oppido Killareti Ecclesiam Sanctae Attractae solo aequatam, quo opere completo, preces iterari debent ad implorandam pro clero ejusdem oppidi elevationum ritus in Festo Sanctae Attractae. Contrariis non obstantibus quibuscumque.Die 28 Julii 1864.Locus ✠ SIGILLIC. Episcopus Portuen. et S. RufinaeCard. Patrizi S. R. C. Praef.D. Bartolini, S. R. C. Secretarius.
Reverendissimus Dominus Patritius Durcan Episcopus Achadensis in Hibernia exponens in sibi concredita Dioecesi a tempore immemorabili viguisse cultum Sanctae Attractae Virginis inter Sancti Patritii alumnas adnumeratae, a Sanctissimo Domino Nostro PIO PAPA IX. humillime postulavit ut, die XI. Augusti Sanctae Attractae recurrente memoria, a Clero Achadensi in Officio et Missa de communi Virginum recitari valeant cum oratione Lectiones secundi nocturni propriae, uti supra adnotantur, ex probatis legitimisque fontibus desumptae. Sanctitas porro Sua, referente subscripto Sacrorum Rituum Congregationis Secretario precibus clementer annuere dignata est; dummodo Festum Sanctae Attractae instituatur ritu duplici minori, Rubricae serventur, ac interim Episcopus Orator efficaci adhibita pastorali sollicitudine Fideles cohortari et excitare curet ad instaurandam in oppido Killareti Ecclesiam Sanctae Attractae solo aequatam, quo opere completo, preces iterari debent ad implorandam pro clero ejusdem oppidi elevationum ritus in Festo Sanctae Attractae. Contrariis non obstantibus quibuscumque.
Die 28 Julii 1864.Locus ✠ SIGILLIC. Episcopus Portuen. et S. RufinaeCard. Patrizi S. R. C. Praef.D. Bartolini, S. R. C. Secretarius.
DIE XI. AUGUSTI IN FESTO SANCTAE ATTRACTAE, VIRGINIS, DUPLEX.