will only be restored by a definition of that which Catholics have believed to the present day. We must therefore treat the subject; and, I would add, must decide in the affirmative. For otherwise, in the face of existing circumstances, if this subject be not discussed, serious harm will be done to the faithful. Governments will not have the respect they should for the Holy See, and the authority of the Pope will be depreciated.
"While I was delivering my speech," adds Guibert, in a most significant conclusion to this account, "I was watching Cardinal Antonelli, who was seated opposite. And I saw him give indications of approval each time I emphasised my opinions. My discourse produced a considerable effect upon my colleagues. It seemed to be new light, assisting and strengthening those who were irresolute on the proper course to pursue. Prelates who spoke after me did me the honour to base themselves upon the reasons I had propounded, and the conclusion of our meeting was that the subject should be laid before the Council.
"As soon as our deliberations were ended, the Cardinals went to the Pope and reported to him all the incidents. They said that, thanks to the Archbishop of Tours, a favourable vote had been obtained. The Holy Father expressed his keen satisfaction."[1]
Such was Guibert's important share in promoting the great result. If his health gave way in Rome and compelled him to leave before the issue was determined, he could well be spared, for he had done his work. It was appropriate that so influential a mover in the Congregation of Proposals should afterwards be selected for the Archbishopric of Paris, and the rank of Cardinal.
But to whom should the task be intrusted of introducing the great subject into the Council itself? There was a personage singularly fitted for this difficult work. One of the most active spirits in Rome was
- ↑ Follenay, Vie de Cardinal Guibert, ii p. 426.
