This quasi-episcopal position was considered by the Congregation to qualify them for admission to the Vatican Council. These decisions were of great significance, as they added, it is said, almost two hundred votes.[1]
Secondly, as to regulations for procedure,[2] the Cardinals asserted that the Pope alone had the right to introduce matters for discussion. Otherwise, argued the Cardinals, the Council would become a constitutional chamber. But a Council is only summoned to discuss what the Pope desires to have discussed; not to introduce their individual conceptions of what ought to be done. If any reminiscences of the principles of Constance, Pisa, and Basle floated before the Cardinals' memories; if any distant echo of their predecessors' intention to reform the Church in its head and members haunted them; it was instantly condemned by the theory now introduced. By way of dispelling the possible objection that the Pope might omit important matters, the Cardinals observed that it is an unlikely thing, that it must be left to Providence, and that you cannot expect perfection in human affairs. Whatever, therefore, the Bishops desire to introduce for conciliar discussion, they must report it, not to the Council, but to the Pope or to his representative; and the Pope will determine whether its introduction is desirable or not. The Cardinals recommend that a Commission should be created for this purpose.
In the third place, it was thought desirable that four permanent Commissions should be formed: one on faith; one on discipline; one on religious orders; one on missions. It was suggested that two-thirds of the members should be chosen by the Bishops and one-third by the Pope. Pius, however, decided
