would neither serve its purposes nor do its work. A sensible change of tone was then perceived. The correspondents wrote of everything but of this unanimity. The newspapers became almost silent. The leading articles almost ceased. From that time they exchanged the tone of confidence and triumph for a tone of irritation and of no little bitterness.
Nevertheless, a new hope arose. Governments were acted upon to make representations, and all but to menace the Holy Father.[1] For a time, confidence revived. It was thought impossible that the joint note of so many Powers, and the joint influence of so many diplomatists, could fail of their effect. It did not seem to occur to those who invoked the interference of the Civil Powers that they were thereby endeavouring to deprive the Council of its liberty: which, in those who were complaining, in all languages, that the Council was not free, involved a self-contradiction on which I need not comment. Neither did they seem to remember that those who invoke the secular power against the spiritual authority of the Church, whether to defeat a sentence already given, or to prevent the delivery of such a sentence, are ipso facto excommunicate, and that their case is reserved to the Pope.[2] This,
- ↑ See Appendix, p. 173.
- ↑ Appellantes seu recurrentes ad curiam sæcularem ab ordinationibus alicujus judicis ecclesiastici excommunicationem incurrant Papæ reservatum ex cap. 16 Bullæ In Cœna Domini, sive illi judices ecclesiastici sint ordinarii sive delegati, ut patet in eadem Bulla: et multi dicunt hoc procedere, etiamsi sic appellantes et recurrentes nulla decreta poerialia aut inhibitiones contra eosdem judices ecclesiasticos obtineant; alii tamen contrarium tenent. Vide interpretes super dicta Bulla cap. 19, et Bonacina de Censur. in partic. disp. 1, q. 17, punct. 1, num. 28, qui auctores pro utraque parte
c 2
