Canon Moufang, of Mayence, spoke on the university question at Würzburg in 1864. Of all the members of the convention he was best fitted to do justice to the subject. Since 1848 Dr. Moufang has been present at almost every one of the sixteen general conventions, and whatever good has been accomplished by them he has promoted and encouraged. Connected with most of the Catholic movements of our age, he understands the feelings of his Catholic countrymen and knows how to give forcible and opportune expression to them; at times his words are irresistible, like the mountain torrent. At Munich he delivered a discourse on the Holy Father and his difficulties; in Aix-la-Chapelle he thundered against the want of principle and of true manliness which distinguishes our times; at Frankfort he ridiculed anti-Catholic prejudices, and at Würzburg he convinced his hearers of the necessity of a Catholic university. But the school question, also, and the relations between capital and labor, he has lately treated in an admirable manner. "Il faut être de son temps," is Moufang's motto, and hence he is one of the representative men of public opinion in Catholic Germany, and when he combats the enemies of the Church the advantage is always on his side. On the nineteenth of December, 1864, Dr. Moufang celebrated the twenty-fifth anniversary of his ordination. Hundreds of priests from the dioceses of Mayence, Limburg, and Freiburg were present on this solemn occasion, which they will cherish for ever in their memory. Dr. Moufang's name immediately suggests that of Canon Heinrich. They are a "par nobile fratrum" in literature as well as in public life, emulating the example of Raess and Weiss and of Augustus and Peter Reichensperger. At the age of thirty, after promoting the organization of the first general convention at Mayence, Dr. Heinrich was appointed secretary of the national council held at Würzburg in 1848. Since 1848 he distinguished himself at almost all the general conventions by his activity and the zeal he displayed in furthering every Catholic enterprise. He is equally active in the committees, in the secret and in the open sessions. He is not only a favorite speaker, but also a skilful controversialist and a journalist of no mean ability. He published the best reply to Renan, and as a theologian and jurist he is able to cope with any adversary.
Prof. Haffner is the worthy colleague of Moufang and Heinrich. He cultivates the science which Aristotle and Plato pronounced the sublimest of all sciences—philosophy. But Haffner is a philosopher who is intelligible even to ordinary mortals; he makes a practical use of his knowledge, and is a favorite at the Rhenish clubs. In fact, there is no reason why he should not be so. His speeches are instructive, sublime in conception, and well written. The details are well arranged and he has due regard for literary perspective. His incomparable humor is unmixed with biting sarcasm, and his figures are exquisitely beautiful. Haffner's speeches are perfect gems. Long may you live, noble son of Suabia!
The Mayence delegates form an attractive group, and they all work right earnestly for the success of the conventions. Beside those already noticed, I shall mention Dr. Hirschel, canon of the cathedral, who presided at the first general meeting of the Christian art unions at Cologne in 1856; Monsignore Count Max von Galen, who delivered an elegant discourse on the Blessed Virgin at Aix-la-Chapelle; Professors Holzammer and Hundhausen, profound scholars; Frederic Schneidier, president of the young men's associations in the diocese of Mayence; and Falk, president of the social clubs or casinos.
Councillor Phillips, of Vienna, is generally chosen chairman of the section of science and the press. Richly does he deserve this distinction, for Phillips is an ornament to German literature, and his work on canon law is a "monumentum aere perennius" which will be numbered among the German classics. On the Catholic press, too, Phillips has conferred a great benefit, for, in conjunction with Jareke and Joseph von Görres, he founded the "Historico-Political Journal," of Munich, which he edited for a long time, assisted by Guido Görres. Being sent as a delegate to the Frankfort Parliament, Phillips was numbered among the men of "the stone house;" that is to say, he belonged to the Catholic party, and became the associate of Döllinger, Lasaulx, Sepp, Förser, Geritz, Dieringer, Von Bally, and others who took an active part in the debate on the relations between church and state. Since 1862 Phillips has been chairman of the committee on the establishment of the Catholic university. The speeches of the learned professor were remarkable for the force of their arguments and the clearness of their ideas. His committee reports are to the point, and he presides with tact and ability.
Privy Councillor Ringseis delivered telling speeches at Aix-la-Chapelle and Munich; at Frankfort and Würzburg he did not make his appearance, being already too much bowed down by age. Ringseis was born in 1785. In the literary world he occupies a prominent position; but he has always been more successful as an orator than as a writer. His appearance is inspiring, his words enthusiastic. The simplicity of his heart, his pleasing cordiality, and the unchanging freshness of his intellect, endear him to all with whom he comes in contact; yet he is one of the men who have bravely weathered all the storms of our age. He resembles an oak that proudly withstands every hurricane.
Baron von Moy was president of the Würzburg convention. From 1832 to 1837 he lectured on constitutional and international laws, and from 1837 he was for ten years professor at Munich, at a time when the fame of the Munich university attracted hundreds of young men to the Bavarian capital, when all Germany knew that there was a great Catholic university at Munich, and when, in the words of Moufang, "Görres, Ringseis, Döllinger, Möhler, Slee, Phillips, Moy, Windischmann, and their colleagues, formed the central group of Catholic Munich." Baron von Moy presided at Würzburg with much tact and success. Age has already made its inroads, but his voice is still rich and agreeable. He is untainted by the ungenial formality of our German professors. In him solid piety is coupled with affability, cordiality, and benevolence, and adorned by true Catholic cheerfulness.
The Catholic professors, on the whole, have taken little interest in these conventions, because the majority of them are unacquainted with real life. There are exceptions, however, such as those mentioned above. Schulte, of Prague, also, has displayed a laudable zeal in every convention until 1862. He favors true progress, and earnestly wishes the Catholics not only to rival but surpass the Protestants in every respect. Sometimes he is a little too exacting in his demands; his expressions are rather strong, and his strictures on abuses are not sufficiently tempered with moderation. Schulte is no visionary, for he is thoroughly acquainted with the state of the Church, but he is carried away by a burning zeal, a kind of holy anger. Hermann Müller, professor at the Würzburg university, a jurist and philologer, and formerly well known as a journalist, was the most handsome member of the Würzburg convention, and his magnificent beard attracted universal attention. The university was likewise represented by Professors Contzen and Ludwig and by Dr. Wirsing. Long continued study has left its traces on the features of Prof. Vering, of Heidelberg, but it has not [{342}] hardened his heart against the claims of the Catholic cause.
At Würzburg sixty-three professors and authors signed an address and sent it to the Holy Father. In it they declare their readiness to submit unconditionally to the decision of the Holy See regarding the meeting of the German literati. I cannot refrain from saying a few words on this meeting, especially as it may be said to have originated in the general conventions. In fact, the sensation caused by the Würzburg meeting has by no means subsided. I have lying before me Döllinger's "Discourse on the Past and Present of Catholic Theology," and criticisms on it by the Mayence "Katholik," the Paris "Monde," and the "Civiltà Cattolica;" also Prof. Hergenröther's speech at Würzburg on meetings of European scholars, the pamphlet of Prof. Michelis, of Braunsberg, and a cutting reply in the November number of "Der Katholik." To these I may add the papal brief to the Archbishop of Munich (December 21, 1863), the despatch of Cardinal Antonelli to the nuncio at Munich (July 5, 1864), and the letter of the Holy Father to Professors Hergenröther and Denzinger, dated October 20, 1864. I fear the matter will take a disagreeable turn, and that our learned professors will bring themselves into difficulty. No doubt there is much truth in Hergenröther's reflections on his colleagues: "All our learned men are not as prudent as they should be; they have not sufficient tact, and are wanting in knowledge of the actual state of things; many a professor in his sanctum acquires ideas wholly at variance with real life."
The Catholic general conventions will not alter their character in order to busy themselves with purely scientific concerns; in short, it cannot become a congress of learned men, nor a substitute for such a congress. Fully persuaded of this fact, Prof. Denzinger declared, in the most explicit terms, that the meeting of the German literati was independent of the sixteenth general convention, which was nowise responsible for its doings.