Page:William John Sparrow-Simpson - Roman Catholic Opposition to Papal Infallibility (1909).djvu/276

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
256
THE VATICAN DECISIONS
[CHAP.

greatly impressed the statesman Ollivier,[1] who said that there was nothing like it on the other side.

Mgr. Maret replied to the sermon, and the preacher issued a rejoinder.[2] But the strength of the Bishop of Poitiers did not lie in argument. He had no learning to measure with that of Maret. He was given to rhetorical and fervid declamation; whereas Maret was measured, historical, deliberate. Bishop Pie accordingly escaped from further discussion in a letter to his clergy, in which he registered a resolution not to allude again to the recent work of a prelate whose character he admired, but whose errors he lamented. Refutation was, he maintained, superfluous, since Maret only repeated his mistakes; and in fact answers to the work were appearing daily. At the same time Bishop Pie cannot resist asserting that the work of Bishop Maret deserves all theological censures short of formal heresy. To which he adds a prediction, fully justified by events, that Maret would abandon his errors and submit himself to the judgment of the Church.

Already in Rome this "advocate of Roman doctrines in their extremest form"[3] had acted consistently with these antecedents. He had been long since cordially received by the Pope, and warmly commended for his diocesan utterances. The special honour had been his of selection to the important Commission on Faith by almost the highest number of votes. Already he had preached in Rome, and told his hearers that they had sown much and reaped little, since two or three false lights had misguided men and disturbed the vision even of the wise. Nevertheless he bade them be of good courage. For two or three new definitions of principle

  1. Ollivier, i. p. 411.
  2. Acta, p. 1277.
  3. Ollivier, i. p. 415.