Images de page
PDF
ePub

West, between the Greek and the Roman Church, between Byzantium and the Holy Empire. As a matter of fact the various churches had begun to know one another better and to love one another. The popularity of Strossmayer was immense in Serbia, and his picture decorated the cabins even of those separated from Rome. They called him affectionately the Bishop.' Both he and Racki concluded that there must be a rapprochement between the churches.

[ocr errors]

But in this matter his Apostolic Majesty had something to say. These dreams of union, these designs of the apostolate must be displeasing to the Governments of Vienna and Budapest. Religious divisions were for them a political advantage, and they emphasized and enlarged them on every possible occasion. Their idea was to divorce the various nationalities and to set up barriers between them.

A picture of Pavlinovic, the founder of the Croatian party in Dalmatia, with his hands in the hands of a Pope, was spread broadcast. This angered the bureaucrats of Vienna, who were quick to see in it a symbol of what the Hapsburg dynasty hated most, a symbol of union. They were again angry when Strossmayer, on the celebration of the tenth centenary of SS. Cyril and Methodius at Kieff, sent to the Orthodox committee a friendly greeting. Francis Joseph hurled the most violent insults at the head of the bishop. Strossmayer, impenitent, did not believe that to desire union and to preach charity were guilty acts. Leo XIII, in his encyclical on SS. Cyril and Methodius, knocked at the door of the Slav souls, and Strossmayer in his Lenten pastoral of 1881 commented on it. Let us never listen, brethren,' he concluded, 'to those who would wish to divide us, they are evidently our common enemies.' Those who wished to divide them belonged to the German bureaucracy of Vienna, Germanized Magyarism. The general policy of the Dual Monarchy, under the devout and edifying exterior which his Majesty affected on feast days, was going to place an obstacle in the way of the apostolic efforts of Leo XIII to propagate throughout the Slav East the very idea of Catholicity.

IV-THE HOLY SEE AND THE BALKAN PROTECTORATE OF AUSTRIA: LEO XIII AND PIUS X

Those peoples whose welfare Strossmayer and Leo XIII had so much at heart were jealously attached to their traditional liturgy and also to their national pride. I am Catholicism, said Austria, and proclaimed herself before the Slav nationalities as the protectoress of the Roman faith, and that the Roman Church in the basin of the Danube should speak to God only in Latin. The Church then appeared one with this foreign power which the Balkan Slav detested as a servile satellite of Germanism. It was one of the master ideas of Leo XIII to break this solidarity.

Strossmayer, after the encyclical of Leo XIII on SS. Cyril and Methodius, would have wished for a month at least to have Mass celebrated in the Slav language in the Catholic churches of Croatia, in order to show to the separated brethren the respect and affection of Rome for their old liturgical language, the only one outside the sacred languages in which Mass is said. Halt there, said Hungary, and Strossmayer had to forego this joy. But in Dalmatia the agitation for the Slav liturgy went on increasing. Austria increased her intrigues, set bishops against one another and priests against bishops, and relied on the Nuncio Galimberti against the Secretary of State to stop the Roman Congregations from carrying out the policy of Leo XIII.

To counteract the leanings of the Pope Austria made great capital out of the Russian peril. In allowing these peoples to use the Oriental rite and to speak to God as the schismatics speak to Him, said Austria, you are allowing them to think as they think. The pile of Paleoslav missals that Leo XIII had had printed in the Propaganda press, at his own expense, for the bishops on the other side of the Adriatic, showed that the Pope did not heed Austria's objections. Austria did all she could to prevent these missals from reaching their destination. But the glorious letter Praeclara, which the Pope in 1894 addressed to princes and peoples, resounded throughout Europe as an invitation to union. A kind of war then began between the Apostolic Empire and the Apostolic See. Rome, disregarding Austria, began to get into closer touch with the Slav States separated from her. A Concordat was signed in 1886 between herself and Montenegro. Rome in future would no longer depend on Austria to defend the interests of the Catholics

in that Slav principality. Vienna became angry, and deprived of his pension, as former professor in the seminary of Dalmatia, the Franciscan who, under the new regime of the Concordat, accepted the Archbishopric of Antivari. The Slavs held that in a corner of the Slav Balkans there was formerly a Church united to Rome and at the same time independent of Austrian influence. There was 10 cathedral, only a few small churches. It was with this poor provision that the Roman Church entered into the Slav State, wishing for no other protection than the authority of Leo XIII.

For a long time the eyes of the Pontiff had been turned towards Serbia with a view to establishing a Concordat. In 1883 a large number of Italian workmen were employed on the construction of a new railroad between Belgrade and Nish. A Barnabite, named Tondini, was sent by Strossmayer to look after them. But Khevenmuller, Minister of Francis Joseph in Belgrade, forbade him. Austria thus cut off from God these poor Italian souls in the land of Serbia. Strossmayer insisted on his rights as Vicar-Apostolic of Serbia, and Tondini at last crossed the frontier. King Milan informed him that a Concordat is a necessity for Serbia. Its dynasty requires, since it has been erected into a Kingdom, that the spiritual head of 15,000 Catholics should not reside outside the country.' Milan repeated the same words to Strossmayer a year later. But Khevenmuller objected to Tondini. It is a principle of our policy,' said he, inherited from Schwarzenberg and from Metternich, that we exercise, on account of the jurisdiction of an Austrian bishop, a sort of control over the Catholics of Serbia.' However, the idea of the Concordat remained in the air. Leo XIII had remarked to the Marquis of Reverseaux, who was taking up the post of French Minister at Belgrade: I wish to nationalize Catholicism in Serbia.' Later on, under King Alexander, the idea took shape and was committed to paper, but one day the papers of the agreements which M. Vesnitch had drawn up with Cardinal Rompolla disappeared from the Royal table. The enemies of the Serbian Concordat had long arms and nimble hands.

[ocr errors]

Vienna detested Cardinal Rompolla from the moment he began a policy of liberation. He would have loved to see a diplomatic combination in which France, Russia and Austria-an Austria differently governed, and otherwise inclined-would counteract the preponderance of Berlin;

but the vanquished of Sadova was as a captive in the hands of his conqueror. Then was presented in 1892 this curious spectacle: the Chancellery of Francis Joseph contending with the Secretariate of State through a German jurist Geffcken and an anonymous writer in the Contemporary Review, ard the Vatican replying through the brochure of a Jesuit, Father Brandi. Geffcken and the writer of the English article painted Austria as the El Dorado of Catholicism. But Leo XIII knew where he was; appearances did not deceive him. Still he continued on good terms with Francis Joseph, and had an immense compassion for him in his family troubles.

At the end of the century, without disturbing this Empire that prided itself on being Catholic, German Lutheranism all at once delivered some insolent blows. The word of order, Los von Rom, carried off from the Church of Leo XIII more than twenty thousand subjects of Francis Joseph. From Saxony and Prussia pastors arrived unexpectedly, eager to carry out the Germanization of Austria through the gospel of the Hohenzollern. Austria had no longer the right of self-protection against whatever came from Berlin. Leo XIII and his Secretary of State took note of these misfortunes in the El Dorado. Austria had ceased to dazzle Rome and ceased also to intimidate it. The Viennese rancours at the conclave of 1903 deprived Cardinal Rompolla of the Tiara. This was the last victory of the Hapsburg dynasty_over_the independence of the Church. On the death of Pius VII, Metternich had written to Count Appony, his Minister at Rome: Constant experience has shown that the formal and open veto that courts privileged to send ambassadors to the Conclave have a right to exercise in the case of a certain Cardinal presents real inconveniences, and almost always when the said courts use this right they find themselves in an unenviable position.' Things turned out badly for Austria after the veto of 1903. She saw Pius X in 1904 salve the Christian conscience by energetic and decisive measures, with a view to protect future Conclaves from any exercise of the pretended right of veto. She felt in 1906 that the passive resistance of the Dalmatian episcopate annulled the success that for the moment she flattered herself with acquiring over the question of the Slav liturgy. She finally learned in June, 1914, that Cardinal Merry del Val had just signed with M. Vesnitch the Serbian Concordat.

This was for Austria a diplomatic disaster. As far as religion was concerned she had no more to do with the Balkans. Rome had given her notice to quit. For the Drang nach Osten, for this drive through the Balkan gap which Germanism wished to carry out towards the East, Austria had received from Berlin instructions, a way bill, and subsidies. She meant to join the Roman Church herself in this Germanic undertaking, the result of which was to be the oppression of the Balkan Slav. The Roman faith, sheltered in this undertaking, was in danger of appearing as the enemy of the Slavs; but what did Austria care? The successful pourparlers of Cardinal Merry del Val with M. Vesnitch brought honour to the Church by putting an end to all equivocation. The Balkans breathed, so did Rome. The Concordat with Serbia stipulated that in the parishes of the Serbian Kingdom which, having regard to the language spoken by the faithful, will be mentioned by name by the Holy See, the Catholics of the Latin rite can in the Sacred liturgy use the Paleoslav Language.' The future began to smile on the liturgies of the past. Strossmayer was dead, Rompolla was dead; but their spirit hovered around. Five weeks later Europe was on fire.

[ocr errors]

V-THE HOLY SEE AND THE POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY OF AUSTRIA: BENEDICT XV

During the years from 1914 to 1918 human ears tried to shut out the tragic uproar so as to hear if the Pope spoke and how he spoke. The attention even with which they listened for the echoes of the Vatican sometimes seemed like an appeal. The questions and the looks of which Rome became the object showed that the prejudices of some against the interference of the Roman authority in human affairs were slowly passing into the rank of archaisms. By a singularly curious volte-face some people, ceasing to take umbrage at the meddlings of the Church, seemed uneasy now at what they called her lack of moral firmness, and seemed to wait with a feverish vexation for the lips of Benedict XV to revive the language of a Gregory VII. And some, who perhaps rejoiced the day before that Luther had taken the edge off the thunderings of the Roman Church, were asking what the Pope was waiting for that he did not excommunicate the violators of right. The Central Powers themselves seemed very discontented with certain acts of the Holy See.

« PrécédentContinuer »