The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-06-08
1NFALL1BLE CONTRADICTIONS.
Anew Items Of PapnI History.

A Few Items Of PapRl History.
The last number of the North German Cor
respondent contains the following remarks on
the question of Infallibility:-
"In the twelfth century a work was pro-
duced by the celebrated philosopher and
theologian Abelard, on the contradictions
and discrepancies that may be found in the
writings of the Fathers of the Church. Sup
posing this eminent scholar were alive, what
would he say about the impending resolution
of the latest Gcumenical Council, by which
the personal infallibility of the Pope is to be
solemnly proclaimed2 We need not search
long for an answer to this question. With
the honest and uncompromising boldness
for which he was distinguished, Abelard
would most probably have declared, If the
Papacy be now declared infallible, all the
predecessors of Plus must have been so too.
But in the face of history who can maintain
such a proposition unless he has made the
cTed0 qua dbSurd1ta the great maxim of his
life p Ands then we can easily imagine the
learned monk, with a causticity which we
cannot initiate, adduce in support of his posi-
ton some such historical details as those we
here subjoin.
"Pope julius l embraced the views of
Athanasius regarding the Father and the Son,
but these same opinions were condemned by
his successor Liberius. Innocent / anathema-
tized Pelagius and all his followers as heretics:
while Zosimus, who succeeded recognized
him as orthodox, but subsequently altered his
views at the command of the Emperor Theo-
dosius. The infallible Vicar of Christ, Hor-
misdas, declared it to be an abominable belief
that one of the three persons of the Trinity
had been crucifed; while John ii and Aga
petus, his successors, both pronounced this
decision to be impious and absurd.
LEO the Great considered the use of bread
and wine in the holy Eucharist as a divine
command and an apostolical institution
confirming in this respect the judgment of
julius land wished to excommunicate
every one who demanded the body of Christ
without drinking his blood Pope Gelasius
in 1876 likewise declared all those to be here
tics who refrained from the cup in the Holy
Communion. Now, if these three popes
were infallible, how did it happen that in the
twelfth century the chalice was withdrawn
from the laity, who had to be satisfied with
the bread alone; and an anathema was hurled
against those who desired to retain the prac-
tice of communicating under both forms?
'Pope Virgilius, in accordance with the
Council of Chalcedon, accepted as orthodox
the writings of three Fathers of the Church.
The Emperor Justinian, however, maintained
that these books contained heretical doc
trines; and the infallible yirgilius hereupon
adopted the imperial decision. After some
time the Pope returned to his former views,
and the Fathers who had been proclaimed
heterodox were rehabilitated and restored to
their places among the orthodox writer's
Justinian, enraged at this conduct threatened
the Pope with deposition, and the infallibility
of Rome again yielded to the menaces of
Byzantium, the result being that the books in
question were after all definitely condemned
as heretical productions. ..
"John XXI established the doctrine that
the Holy Virgin, the Apostles and the saints
were not to be partakers of the joys of Para
disc, nor to be admitted into the presence of
God before the day of judgment. AS this
new dogma, however, was likely to deprive
the clergy of rich source of profit in the
supposed intercession of Mary and the saints
John revoked the bull ia which it had been
announced, and tacitly admitted his error.
Pope Urban VII (1642) strictly forbade
the use of snuff in churches, and Innncsnt
XII threatened obstinate misdemeanants with
his anathema; but Benedict XII, who himself
always carried a snuff box in his pocket re-
voked the interdiction, and permitted the
faithful to refresh themselves with a pinch
during the hours of divine service.
MANY more curious and interesting histo-
rical questions connected with Papal infalli-
bility might be raised such as-Is it admitted
that Leo X was infallible when, declining to
have Luther burned as hereto, he observed:
Il think Brother Martin has a capital head;
all this comes from the envy of the monks;
or when, on another occasion, he jocularly
remarked to Cardinal Bembo, Really it must
be acknowledged that this fable of the gospel
has done us good service. Was Clement
VII infallible who declared himself in favor
of the irresistibility of divine grace, as incul-
Gated by st. Augustine or Urban VII, who
entered the lists against this doctrine In
nocent X, who wished to see the same dogma
|
XI, by whom it was again Internationally
rejected ?"