The book is divided into five sections and a conclusion. The
author goes back and forth between the issues at the time and those proximate
to the Council and integrates them into the decision process. The issues
driving Pius IX were the development of nationalism, liberalism, freedom of
religion, Protestantism, freedom of the press, and the development of citizens
as compared to subjects. Pius IX was one of the last hold outs of the days of
divine rights of rulers. As forms of democracy were developing, challenges from
socialism and communism were being addressed, Pius IX saw a need to strengthen
the papacy.
The author does a reasonably good task at showing the
counter efforts such as Gallicanism which was the French approach of running
the Church the way the French wanted to. Strangely Gallicanism was present
before the Avignon papacy and was intensified during the 14th
century when the Pope was in Avignon. Although not officially part of France at
the time the popes then followed the French crown in many ways. Pius IX saw
this as an anathema. Thus any extension to the 19th century would
have to be wiped out and Pius did this via his call for infallibility.
Even more compelling was the fact that when all of the
issues started with Pius he was also a head of state with his dominion over the
Papal States, the central lands of what was becoming Italy. The Pope owned and
controlled most of central Italy and as nationalism was evolving his control
was under attack. Eventually just months after the Council declared his
infallibility Rome was invaded and taken over by the Italian nationalists, thus
Italy was effectively formed as a nation.
The author blends these facts in a well presented narrative.
He also brings to the fore the opposition of many of the theologians, often
non-clerical and German, who opposed this infallibility dicta. Key amongst them
would be Dollinger, a Bavarian theologian strongly opposed to this new idea. In
fact many of the best theologians were opposed since there was no basis and
furthermore the Conciliar theories dominated, namely such decisions were made
by Church Councils, bishops in concert, and not singularly by a Pope.
Overall the books is superb. However one can raise a few
issues:
1. The Jesuits played a key role in supporting Pius. The
author's document is replete with references and the author himself is a Jesuit.
The rule of the Jesuits frankly should have been more detailed, for their role
was to support the Pope and as such infallibility would logically strengthen
their positions, somewhat.
2. Infallibility took almost two millennia to be stated. As
such one would wonder why no one ever thought of this before? The Councils were
always a way to reach doctrinal decisions. But now one ascribes such a singular
power to a singular man. This is certainly questionable give the cast of
characters who have occupied the seat of Peter over the ages.
3. As with many such efforts one should be drawn back to the
14th century and the battles between John XXII and Marsilius of
Padua and William of Ockham. Ockham went as far in his Work of Ninety Days to
claim John a heretic. His contention has merit. Marsilius predated Montesquieu in
the ideas of representative governments and the fact that divine rights had no
basis. The 14th century players frankly should be mentioned in many
of these discussions.
Overall O'Malley provides a timely, well written, and
balanced presentation of Vatican I, a Council whose closure never occurred due
to the capture of Rome by the Italian forces. O'Malley in the conclusion makes
reference to the impact of this dictum, such as the problems Kennedy had
running for President, for the dictum was interpreted as making Catholics
citizens of a foreign lord and master and demanded fealty to their assertions.
Posts
