(M93) M. Meyendorf, the _charge d’affaires_ of Russia, having been
admitted to a private audience on occasion of the Christmas festivities of
1866, Pius IX. naturally directed the conversation to the painful state of
ecclesiastical affairs in Poland. The Russian minister denied everything,
even the most notorious facts, and ended by casting all the blame on the
Catholics, who, he affirmed, had openly transacted with the Polish
insurrection, whilst the Protestants generally sided with the government.
“Nor was this astonishing,” he added, “considering that Catholicism and
revolution are the same thing.” Pius IX. could not tolerate this false
assertion, which was so absurd that it could have no other object than to
insult him and the whole body of the faithful of whom he was the Chief.
“Depart,” said he to the minister, as he dismissed him, “I cannot but
believe that your Emperor is ignorant of the greater part of the injustice
under which Poland suffers. I, therefore, honor and esteem your Emperor;
but I cannot say as much of his representative who comes to insult me in
my own house.” Pius IX. vainly hoped that the Envoy would be disowned, and
diplomatic relations between Rome and St. Petersburgh continued. When
Alexander II. suppressed, by his own authority, in 1867, the Catholic
diocese of Kaminieck, Pius IX. was obliged to have recourse to the
newspaper press, in order to make known to the Catholics of that
unfortunate country that he appointed the Bishop of Zitomir provisional
administrator. “I have no other means of communicating with them,” said he
“I act like the captain of a vessel who encloses in a bottle his last
words to his family, and confides them to the storm, hoping that the waves
will deposit them on some shore where they will be gathered up.”
(M94) Pius IX. showed himself as generous to princes as to peoples, acting
always as the champion of justice in the cause of the former, as well as
in supporting the undoubted rights of the latter. Francis II., of Naples,
dethroned by his ambitious cousin, King Victor Emmanuel, was, as the
Bonapartes had once been, an exile at Rome, and enjoyed the same princely
hospitality which his predecessor, in 1848, had extended to the Holy
Father in the Kingdom of Naples. Victor Emmanuel remonstrated against this
kindness to a fallen enemy. But in vain! He was powerless. His ally and
patron, however, the French Emperor, was not so easily resisted. This
potentate gave it to be understood, although not in express terms, that
the stay of the French troops at Rome was dependent on the departure of
the exiled monarch. The Pope, alluding to the family of Napoleon I., whom
Pius VII. had kindly received at Rome, replied, satirically, that the
Roman Pontiffs had traditions of hospitality, as regarded their
persecutors, and much more in favor of their benefactors. Napoleon was
ashamed to persist; and Francis II. remained at Rome as long as Pius IX.
was master there.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account