elect of Rottenburg, whose History of the Councils told heavily against the Ultramontanes.
The German Episcopate was under no illusions as to the introduction of this doctrine into the coming deliberations in Rome. Accordingly they set other subjects aside[1] to discuss the question. It was declared that a question so momentous required the production of proofs from Tradition; proofs of such a kind as to satisfy fully the demands of criticism, while leaving opponents full liberty of speech. They proceeded to examine the opportuneness of any definition. On the one side it was declared that Councils hitherto had only passed decisions on questions of urgent necessity. Now the present subject presented no such necessity. There existed no danger, either to the purity of the Faith, or to the peace of the Church. Viewed relatively to the Oriental Churches, a definition would be altogether inopportune. Eastern Christians admit a primacy of honour, and might be induced to admit a primacy of jurisdiction. But they hold with such tenacity to the ancient traditions that it was hopeless to imagine they would ever assent to Papal Infallibility. The same consideration holds with reference to Protestants. And also for the Catholics of Germany the dogma would be dangerous.
On the other hand, a member of the Assembly urged that by many people the dogma was desired ; that the opposition must not be exaggerated; that the number of German Catholics was relatively few; that the promulgation of the Immaculate Conception dogma already involved implicitly that of Papal Infallibility.[2]
In the following discussion Bishop Hefele spoke with strongest emphasis.[3] He had never believed in Papal
