Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1870-06-13
The InfallibiIity Dogma.


are logical from their own. The
question of Catholic iniallibility j:
not generally understood even by in
telligent Catholics. Possibly il
is not well understood by all intelli
gent Catholics. If the Church IS in.
fallible, men are apt to argue, and the
Pope is also infallible, there would
be, should the Pope affirm a PROPOSE
tiOn and the Church deny it, two mu-
tually contradictory declarations,
both Of which must be true; which
is absurd. This argument, at
the first blush, seems decisive;
but examination will show that, 50
far as Catholics are concerned,
it has no force at all. Strictly
speaking, il has no force anyhow, for
If the Pope and the Church are both
infallible they cannot disagree. Truth
is one: and those who agree with
truth must agree with each other.
But Catholics are not logically at lib
erty TO question the infallibility Of the
Pope. They believe the Church to be
iniallible. But why? On what, in
their estimation, does its infallibility
rest? Confessedly on Christ's promise
TO Peter that his faith should not fail.
The Church, them is intallible, be-
cause Peter, its foundation and head,
is infallihle, and Peter, who lives in
his successors, is infallible because
Christ promised that he should not be
left to err, though, as it appears to me,
some word suggestive Of infallible
guidance, rather than that of infallible
itself would be more Appropriated than
the word infallible, seeing that the
seat of the infallibility is wholly eX-
terror to the sO-called infallible one.
Such is the rationale of Catholic infal-
libility. 1t is clearly the infallibility,
not OF the Pope, but Of the Church,
which is open to question under the
Catholic premises, and against which
the above stated redUctiO dd dbSlIrdlt7l
spends whatever force it has. But in
strictness, the infallibility of neither
is open TO question under the prem
ises.
The promise of Christ, which is the
alleged guarantee of Catholic infalli-
bility, cannot be fulfilled without the
Church and the Pope alike are pro-
tected from error, for the error of the
Church would involve that of the
Pope, and the Pope is in general the
sole organ of the Church. The whole
question logically turns on Christ's
fidelity to His promise. If He is
faithful, He must protect from error
the Pope no less than the Church,
making them agree with each other
through agreement with truth; and,
if he is not, there is an end to the
question, and, for that matter, to the
o.
the most intelligent advocates Of papal
infallibility. And such, unqUestiOn-
ably, is the rigorous logic Of the case,
considered from a Catholic point OF
view.
Fearing that may have done some
thing less than justice to the case,
however, l will subjOin a statement
which has been kindly handed me by
one Of the ablest and most eminent Of
living Catholics. My object is to pre-
sent the case as it is conceived by the
OF the Council. This object
the statement effects. 1t is eminently
authentic. 1t is as follows:
81. All the infallibility of Church
and Pope is based, not on man, but on
God; man, whether individual, as the
Pope, or collective, as the body of
Bishops, is naturally and intriBEically
fallible; but God is clearly infallible, I
and His power, true to His promises, /
can surely guard man or men, extrin-
sically, from error, in order that His |
whole work may not be marred by |
the whole Church being led into er-
rOr.
''2. No Catholic claims that the /
Pope is infailible, much less impeach- |
able, as a private individual; the only /
question turns on his official and pub /
.Ic infallibility, when, as supreme /
Judge, he decides mOOted questions of /
aith and morals for the whole Church. |
This happens very seldom and at long |
once in a century |
during the long periods often inter
yening between General Councils. |
Three hundred and seven years have 1
elapsed since the close OF the last |
Council (the Council of Trent, |
Turing which the Pope, in his official /
as supreme judge and as or
gan OF the Church, has sOlemnly de-
,ided doctTinal points three OF four
lines, with the full adhesion Of the
whole Church. BE is the organ and
A4OAAAl-DlCL VI AlAt NAAA4AAAf a. L NeNA
Vas Of the Apostolic College.
&" 3. In this capacity Of official head
{ is not at all more difficult TO sup
pose that Christ, in virtue OF His sa-
red promises, will guard the Pope |
rom official error misleading the
whole Church, than it is to conceive
hat the collective body of some
hOusand bishops in the Church
5 similarly guarded from error. one
5 Just as much a miracle as the other;
nd the official infallibility Of the
Pope, under these circumstances, is
connected with the Off
ial infallibility of the Church itself.
Both stand and tall together, logically
nd in fact.
"a. In all Church history it has
ever been known that the official de-
isiOn OF the Pope has not been accept
d by the Church. Such decisions
ave been invariably sustained, and
ever reversed. This is undOubted.
-. The iniallibility Of the Pope
'hurch as founded by Christ, who is
rod, and cannot deceive, nor be de-
eived. The Pope, as successor to
'eter, is the visible foundation stone
( the Church, the divinely appointed !
'Onfirmer Of his brethren, the great ! {
hief shepherd, to whom the whole
Ock, sheep and lambs, pastors and {
eople, were committed John xxi)-
he visible Primate and head of the [
'hurch, so appointed by Christ. Now,
Ow can the building (the Church, be ]
lfallibiy stable if the foundation he
often or failible? How can the 'breth- ;
en- be infallibly confirmed if the !
be fallible2 How can the ,
heep and lambs be infaIlibly gov
rBed and fed il the chief shepherd is
lllible, going astray and leading
hem to poisoned pastures? How, in
ne, can the body live even, much
sss be infalIible, if the head be cut of
r be fallible? The head guides and
ives life to the body.
''G. An illustration may be found in
Il civil governments, including the
.merican. The decisions of inferior
)urts are fallible and liable to be re-
ersed; but when the Supreme Court ,
fhcially decides, its decision is ire
all practical intents and I
urposes infallible.
~. The definition viii make ne
rsctieal change whatever in what has
cen the universal usage for centuries.
is strictly confined to the spiritual
rider; it interferes with no govern
lent or political combination; it will
My crush out the factious opposition
( fGallicanism, which originated with !
,Ouis AIN-LG France c'Pst nlOi-WhO l
SISTED the Pope to secure the rich !
evenUes of vacant sees, the regdle, as
was called. Gallicanism is neither !
sh nor flesh, neither Catholicism nor !
rotestantism; it is a sort of halfway :
Ouse, combining Catholic PRINCIPLES (