No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 November 2011
The so-called Roman question — that is, the question whether the situation caused by the Italian occupation of Rome in 1870, whereby the Pope was deprived of his territorial possessions, is compatible with the freedom required for the exercise of his high office by the head of the Catholic Church — was a matter of deep concern, in particular to German Catholics, during the World War. It was hoped in all seriousness that the victory of the Central Powers would bring about a positive solution to this question and restore the political independence of the Pope. Such works, among others, as those of Hoeber and Sägmüller, and especially Bastgen's three thick volumes, bear witness to this feeling. But the last-named work is a disappointment. The author has, to be sure, assembled a vast amount of material in contemporary documents, covering the whole period from the rise of the Papal temporal power until to-day. He is also to be commended for devoting but few pages to the period before the French Revolution and laying his main stress on the restoration of the Papal State in the nineteenth century and its development down to the present, so that the second half of the second volume is entirely devoted to the years of the World War. But he has been criticized on all hands for giving his documents and extracts from periodicals and newspapers with no such fullness as the size of his work and his own announcements gave reason to expect. He has also taken his task too easily — for instance, merely copying out the articles of the “Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung” (important as that organ is for ecclesiastical questions), instead of going to original sources or citing other journals, as he ought to have done. And his reproduction of the material does not conform to the standards of scholarship. Taking the work, however, for what it is, it is not to be denied that, especially in the last parts, it brings together a great deal that cannot be so conveniently found elsewhere; and in spite of the defects named the book is well worth buying and deserves a place in every considerable library. — That the problem of the status of the Pope in international law has also been under consideration by the Catholics of Holland, is shown by Schneider's discussion. He views the temporal sovereignty of the Pope as inseparable from his spiritual authority; and consequently sees in the Italian law of guaranty a mere act of violence, and in the exclusion of the Pope from the Peace Conference and the League of Nations not only a gross injustice but a bad blunder.
page 134 note 2 Compare Fritz Vigener, Schlözers römische Briefe (HZ 121, 1920, 93–112). The letters written by Schlözer in the years during which he was ambassador have just been published: Kurd von Schlözer, Letzte römische Briefe. ix, 221 pp. Stuttgart, Deutsche Verlagsangtalt, 1924.
page 139 note 3 On Catholicism in the various countries outside of Germany scarcely any publications of importance have come to my attention. I note here the following: Bosch, Karl, Joris Karl Huysmans' religiöser Entwicklungsgang. vii, 251 pp. Constance, Romer, 1920. Giacometti, Zaccaria, Die Genesis von Cavours Formel Libera chiesa in libero stato. Zürich dissertation. Aarau, Sauerländer, 1919. (A good piece of work, containing many references to Cavour's own religious development.) Laros, Matthias, Kardinal Newman, viii, 104 pp. Mainz, Knies, 19—. Schneider, Johannes, Bischof Dupanloup [of Orleans] als Pastoralpädagoge. Freiburg i. B. disssertation. 190 pp. Strasburg, Hauss, 1914.
page 139 note 4 See the instructive accounts of the literature on this subject by Fritz Vigener, HZ 121 (1920), 488–512; 125 (1921), 108–142. A fairly complete report of the literature up to 1913 will be found in Valmar Cramer, Bücherkunde zur Geschichte der katholischen Bewegung in Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert (Apologetische Tagesfragen 6). 198 pp. Munich-Gladbach, Volksverlag, 1914.
page 143 note 5 Compare Heinrich Schrörs, Katholische Staatsauffassung. Kirche und Staat. vii, 102 pp. Freiburg, Herder, 1919; and Karl Böckenhoff, Katholische Kirche und moderner Staat. 208 pp. Cologne, Bachem, [1920].
page 153 note 6 So the name is written by the latest biographer, not ‘Hoffbauer,’ as we usually see it.
page 154 note 7 On the latest edition of this work, by Pastor, see this Review, January, 1924, p. 4.
page 160 note 1 At the same time, too, Kissling has been writing a popular biography of Cardinal Ximenez (Lebensbilder aus dem Orden des heiligen Franziskus, vol. I). x, 83 pp. Fully illustrated. Münster, Aschendorff, 1917.
page 166 note 2 Mulert has since published a second edition of the first and only volume of Dilthey's work, adding to it parts of the continuation from the author's papers (xxxii, 879 pp. Berlin and Leipzig, Vereinigung wissenschaftlicher Verleger, 1922).
page 168 note 3 It may here be remarked that, in opposition to this judgment, the latest generation of German theologians, who have come forward since 1920 — such men as Barth, Gogarten, and Brunner — are frankly turning their backs upon Schleiermacher and even declaring war on his theology. For this tendency, see Ferdinand Kattenbusch, “Die deutsche evangelische Theologie seit Schleiermacher. Ihre Leistungen und ihre Schäden” (fourth, completely revised edition of “Von Schleiermacher zu Ritschl”). viii, 124 pp. Giessen, Töpelmann, 1924.
page 169 note 4 Dunkmann has developed his ideas in a definitive system in his book, “Religions-philosophische Kritik der religiösen Erfahrung als Grundlegung christlicher Theologie.” Gütersloh, Bertelsmann, 1917.
page 173 note 5 See Carl Albrecht Bernoulli, “Franz Overbeck und Friedrich Nietzsche.” 2 vols. Jena, Diederichs, 1900; and “Friedrich Nietzsches Briefwechsel mit Franz Overbeck,” hrsg. von Richard Oehler und Carl Albrecht Bernoulli. Leipzig, Inselverlag, 1916.
page 176 note 6 See also the same author's collection of Bismarck's sayings under the title “Bismarck's Religion” (Klassiker der Religion 16). 154 pp. Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1922.