85
85 in Rome of a form justly offensive to the European powers. But this was no repeal; much less was it any command or permission to the bishops to discontinue their enjoined publications in their respective cathedrals. In fact, the bull is in as full and strong validity and operation as ever; and it cannot be otherwise without breaking down the whole edifice of Papal discipline. That its primitive force continues, notwithstanding partial, or rather simply apparent, relaxation, is proved by the admission of Romanists: Count Ferdinand Dal Pozzo, Catholicism in Austria, pp. 182, 3; Card. Erskine, in Parliamentary Report concerning Roman Catholics in Foreign Countries, 1816, p. 341; Dr. Sleven, in the Eighth Report on Irish Education, p. 256.[1]
But in order to put the reader in a position to judge for himself on a point where every artifice is used to mislead, I will set before him the clause in the anathematising bull, which concerns literature, and which stands first and foremost in the black list; putting within brackets a clause which has been added in later times.
- ↑ See the testimonies at length in Lit. Pol. pp. 260, 1. De Potter is added.
