The New York herald., 1870-01-02
The Question Of Papal InfaIlibili,y.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD:-
Among the questions which 1t is supposed will be
discussed by the Ecumenica Council the one which
exctes most general interest Is undoubtedly that or
Papa nalllbility and already some OF the most dis
tingulshed Catholic historians and theoogians have
expressed their opinions upon 1t. They have
generally nnlted in cOndemnlng IT. and indeed, it
must be admitted that neither history nor reason
appears to justify the proposed dogma.
Among the arguments afforded by history the con.
demnatIon OF Pope Honorius I. by the Council OF
ConstantIn0ple, IN $50, might be cited. BY this
Council Honorious was pronounced hereto. From
this 1t Is evident that II Papal infallbity was not
wholly unth0ught OF In the seventh centur y, 1t was
not, at least, a prevail ng doctrine.
Again, at the close OF that melancholy period
which Catholics must ever regard with sorrow,
when for moro than generation two rival
Popes thundered anathemas at each other. and
finally three pontifrs in different parts Of Europe
claimed the leadership Of the faithful, we find that
this shameful schlsm was ended by the Council OF
Constance, which met in the year 14l4. and deposed
the three rivals and elected another. Martin w.,
must have belonged by right to no one OF those de-
posed. be nfalllbe the action OF this Council was
certainly an unjustnable usurpation OF authority.
IL Is true that the supremacy OF the Pope has had
many advocates. It Is not y newly proposed doc
trine. One OF Its most prominent advocates was
ton to the papacy, held that Coupclls were superior
10 the Pope, but after his election publishes bull
IN condemnation OF himself and in favor OF the papa
listen rather to what he said IN his mature years
than to the erroneous opinions OF his youth. In his
there Is reason TO lear that hlS judgment was
warped by his ambition.
Otner ponGifs have apparently been inclined to
accord some authority to the bishops OF the Church.
and the threat OF assembling q Council has been
used against u pope not without effect. The Jesuit
order has long cherished this dogma, but they have
not succeeded IN making IT popular among
Catholics.
There are few questions upon which so many
arguments might be offered on either side. 1t is, IN
pears difficult TO reconcile the well known text from
which the church derives her authority with Papai
personal inlaollity. II was not against the Pope,
IN Sc, that the great promise was made that the
gates OF hell should li0t prevail, but against the
Church; and the word church does not surely mean
one person General Council represents the
Church, and Catholics generally admit that II is
reasonable to believe IN It's infallibity II, too, the
Council OF Constanhn0ple could condemn Pope
rity superior to his. Hence he, ana OF course all
POpes, have been falltbe. II the Council was falll-
bic when " pronounced Honorus hereto the pres
ent Council may be falDle when II declares the
Pope inIalllDe. IL Will scarcely be said that both
Pope and Council In union may be infable in
making such declaration for then the Pontin, not
being necessarily fres from error IN procaiming
TINS DOGMA would De certainly infallibe IN regard
10 none.
to bear upon this question, which IL, perhaps, the
most difficult OF all--whether, ia declaring such u
dogma, anu thus renounclng us authority Rnd the
authority OF all future Councils the Council does
not exceed Its powerf Can q Council thus render
nu2at0ry In advance the DEGREES Of all Councils to
Gomez The question ID indeed puzzling one, and
is likely 10 create endless controversy.
Lastly, the Council should not declare any dogma
without believing that the common sense OF Catho.
hes throughout tne world ls In its favor. The dog
ma OF the immaculate conception was not promul-
gated until almost all the Catholic bishops had been
Consulted and they mad declared their own opinions
ana those OF their people to DO In Its favor. WnaI
then ~ the opinion oil Catholics upon this subjects
The sentiments OF French German and Polish Catho
lies are undoubtedly opposed to II. The Americans
have so far been silent; not because we think, that
they are attached to the doctrine proposed, but
rather because they have had confidence IN their
bishops 10 them, we suspect the late reports from
Rome that the American bishops are disposed TO be
ulrramontane have not been welcome.
PaDai infaiblity Ii not only subject Of interest
to Catholics, but from Its connection with temporal
a1alrs cannot be regarded without some degree
even OF anxiety by protestauts. The Pope has re
quested the prayers OF Catholics for the Council and
surely for nothing should they pray more ierventy
than tnat this question be brought before the as
semped prelates they may discuss IL with wisdom
ana decide II with justice CATHOLIC
A Catholic Qucsti0n-What Becomes Of the