The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1870-09-04

0Ogm0 Wn1Ch IL was 1mpOrCanC VIC enOuiu
make known to the Holy Father the Pope.
There were twenty bishops dwelling TO-
gether in our American College at Rome.
We met to know what course we should
pursue with regard to this matter. The
Archbishop of Baltimore urged us to do
what we proposed, viz, to write to the
Pope most respectful letter, and impiore
him not to have this subject brought before
the Council. I drew up the address to the
Pope in Latin, and was the first to sigr 1t. |
Twenty Archbishops and BISHOPS
signed also. Almost all of them were
Americans, except the Archbishop OF HAL
fax and two others. The Archbishop OF
Baltimore, as I said, urged us to this
course, but he declined to sign the petit
ton because he was q member OF one OF
the Committees on Faith. some other
bishops made up their minds to sign no pa
per on this question, either Tor or against:;
Besides this there were lao German ana
Hungarian and even Italian and French
bishops who had addressed similar petitions
to the Holy Father. There are others, also,
who declined, because they said it would
show want Of unanimity and union among
bishops. The Holy Father did not think
proper to adopt our suggestions. :,
When my turn came to speak on the
subject of Infallibility, spoke after the
venerable patriarch of Jerusalem, whom L
had known for many years. he stated IN
| his discourse several things which TOOK
| swer; he was strong speaker. In the
first place he made striking analogy be-
| tween Monoethism and Gallicanism; he
showed that these passed through the same
phase, that they went side by side. This
discourse was very ingenious, very deep,
the French Bishops. When l entered the
pulpit 1 addressed myself to the Council,
and then, before I delivered the discourse
which had proposed for this solemn occa-
sion, asked if l could make some remarks as1
on the grafton which had just then been
delivered by the Holy Patriarch of Jerusa-
lem. In the course Of his remarks he said
we were discussing question that hao
long since been decided, that certain
Council of Lyons and Council of Florence
had declared the definition OF the dogma
that the Pope had full power to declare In
fallibly. Why, then, do we waste our time
1 in discussing it at the present time SAID
to the Cardinals Council. am exceed
ingly obliged to the venerable Patriarch OF
Jerusalem for placing us in such GOOD COM
pany. Every one knows that this Council
at Lyons, after the Council at Florence,
examined the question of the Pope's 1nfal-
libility, but they did not see their way
through, they could not find sufficient EVIL
dence in Scripture or tradition to define
the personal, independent, separate, abso-
lutte infallibility of the Pope; therefore
they laid the question aside" Then pro-
ceeded to say what had proposed to say
to the Cardinals: You must allow me
frankness to say that the greatest error, If
not fault, has been committed by you or by
those who had direction of this Council ;
that error is this: You did not from the
beginning state what youlwant by your dog
ma. You say the Pope has infallibility,
but it has never been decided at what time,
or how, or in what manner. want to know
when I am to obey the Pope as an infailible
interpreter of the teachings of the Holy
Scriptures and of the teachings of tradition
You have never informed u.s." My beloved
friends, think this sufficient vindicatior
, in reply to paper in the East which will
not name, which has greatly abused me
That paper said I was obstinately, lrrever
> emily opposed to anything that emanatet
from Rome, and especially on the subjec
: of infallibility. I will turn to the Who'll,
tenor Ds o Of my life in this city. I Their said
" Your definition of Infallibility has caused
: a great deal of trouble. 1t created schism
Q and differences Of opinion in the Church
: One Pope, 1 imagine it was Nicholas L.
i taught that baptism in the name of Jesu
o was all sufficient, without the name of tn
(; Father and the Holy Ghost. If he were in
q fallible he never would have taught that
u Here is John AAll;, who teaches , from TN
l. God on their lips will be in beatitic con
1 dition until the day of Judgment. Are W
't to consider those teachings ex-cathedraf
re Well, when I got to that part of my di;
:" course told the Cardinals in Council tn:
~ there was an other weightier objection whic
:. 7 wished to have removed before gave III
~ assent to that dogma, and that was, no
,e we are to understand the claims of Bon
-, ~ face VIII, who said, Two swords al
given me by God, q spiritual and a tempe
~, raj one 2" sought in the Dominica
~ library of Minerva, in Rome, to refresh m
in memory, and to see on what grounds the
~, ,n claimed the right of controlling temporal
~ affairs, of deposing Henry Will, or Eliz
';i beth, or any other temporal Prince, or a
f solving their vassals from their oath of all
. ne glance, if their sovereigns did not respe
, the act of accommodation by the Churc
>, I could not find any text of authority +
IA that in the Bible; hence / wanted the Cou
co to saw whether they asserted a right of tn
~. kind, or assumed it as a right. The emit
,ha Council with one voice cried out: Tho
nc Popes had no authority, no commissi
400 from God, to pretend to any such powel
oso Well, told them that thanked Goo
~ had spoken, and had it decided by I'll
" Council that instead of assuming the tt
M; ponsibility of those by-gone times,
ore day had gone by when such things we
!. possible. We have done great deal
the having these two important matte
he settled.
ca, The question was also raised by "a
er. dinal: % What is to be done with the Pc
of if he becomes q hereto 7" 1t was answer
yor that there had never been such an examp
his INT in such a case a Council of Bisht