PRINCE BISMARCK AND THE VATICAN.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume II, Issue 89, 9 January 1875, Page 6

PRINCE BISMARCK AND THE VATICAN.

By telegram from Europe, we are informed that Prince Bismaeck stated in course of a reply to Herr "Windhorst in the German Parliament, « I am in possession of conclusive evidence that the (Ecumeuical Council was cut short on .account of the Franco-German war. The councils would have been very different had the French been victorious. I know from the very best sources that Napoleon was dragged into the war, very much against his will, by Jesuitical influences. At the eleventh hour he had determined on ppace, and kept his resolution for half an hour, but ultimately he was overpowered by persons representing the Vatican." *

The above is the statement said by the telegram to Lave been made in the Eeichstag, but the proofs paid to be in the Prince's possession, were not given by him. Quod gratis asseritur gratis neqaiur, and' and therefore we give each one of these statements an emphatic denial. This is not the first time that Bismarck ™* m % de groundless charges against the Jesuits and the Holy bee, and indeed the entire Catholic body. Again and again he has been challenged to give some evidence of the truth of his slanderous charges ; but never has he been able to bring forward a single particle of evidence, and in the present instance he has not even attempted to give any proofs of his statements. Had he any proofs he would have been only too glad to place them before the world ; and the telegram would have informed us of them Until, consequently, we see Prince Bismaeck's conclusive evidence, we shall continue to disbelieve every one of his statements. However, we are in a position to state from our personal knowledge some of the statements are untrue. For example Prince Bismabck affirms he has conclusive evidence "that the Oecumenical Council was cut short on account of the Franco-German War." « The councils would have been different had the French been victorious." In the first place it is not true that the Council was cut short by the Franco-G-erman War. It is notorious that the Council continued to sit alter the proclamation of this war, and during its progress, and that it was prorogued in consequence of the invasion of the States of the Church by the Sardinian army. Bismaeck must eithsr have a very short memory or he must be well assured of the gullability of his partisans. In the next place, if the telegram means that the Prince said that the decrees of the Vatican Council would have been different had the French been victorious, the statement is utterly false. The war, or the fear of its consequences, had not the slightest influence on its decrees and under any circumstances they would have been precisely what they are. If the meaning of Bismaeck be, tnat the Council would not have been prorogued had the

French been victorious, his statement may be true or false but we are certain that he has no conclusive evidence one way or the otber. What the Prince states about Jesuitical influences, and as to Napoleon's being overpowered by persons representing the Vatican, is also absolutely unteue. The very contrary is the fact. The Catholics and the Holy See, instead of wishing for the war or endeavouring to bring it about, were opposed to it, being convinced that it was proclaimed and waged in ihe cause of the revolution They considered it a calamity for the Church from the very beginning, and felt convinced that, no matter how it resulted, it could bring only evil and embarrassment on all. These, we know, were 4e sentiments entertained m Rome at the time the war was proclaimed and there were many then who regarded Napoleon's action in the light of an action done by a man under a judgment and helping to inflict on himself a well deserved chastisement. But no one in Rome helped to bring about the war, or rejoiced in it. The contrary was the fact. Is it not strange that a man in the position of Bismabck should descend to the adoption of calumnious statements in his contest with Catholicity and Christianity? His conduct is ignoble in the extreme, and would disgrace even the shabbiest bigot of the Exeter Hall school. But so it is buctt.has been the characteristic of the enemies, of the Gnurch from the beginning. Even great men, so soon as they become persecutors of the Church, become mean, and irrational, and untruthful, and we regret x to see that even this enlightened age presents us with no exceptions to the general rule.