The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1872-07-21
From the Southwestern Presbyterian
INFALLIBILTTY As A FISH STORY.

IFrom The so.thve.tern PresbyterianI
INFALLIBrLTTY AS FISH STORY.
one. Our neighbors of the CATHOLIC MES
sENGER have challenged us to discuss the
dogma of Papal Infallibility. This Motor
seems to be a serious one to them, at all
events, it is the corner stone of the Papacy,
and if it is true, we are more than willing
to know it. But we confess that their dis
courses only seem to make the matter
more and more improbable.
1. For If it be true that any one claim
ing to be ON officer in the Christian Church
is infallible, We ought to have como clear
and conclusive evidence of the fact, from
Apostles, the inspired writer's. Claim as
much as you please, the opinions of man.
the inquiry will continue to present itself,
what is the testimony of scripture We
are told in reply to this question:
We may wrangle forever over Bible texts
There is no sect SO absurd or fnpfous but has
been able to give some specious color to it's ex-
Let us then ask what did the Fathers of the
Church think on this subject
For our part we agree on this point.
with the opinion expressed, when the mat
by Archbishop Connolly, Of Halifax: ~ will
have nothing-said he--but the indubitable
word of God, made into dogma. Tie
opinion of ten thousand theologians do
not suffice me-" Quirinus, p. 500.
But the investigation of the passages OF
of this dogma, such as we have published,
from the pen of Archbishop Kenrick.
shows that those texts do not prove "Papai
supremacy, far less, Papal Infallibility."
| g. The champions of infalli6iiity then
invoke the testimony Of writer's OF the
early centuries of Christianity. We are
assured that the Fathers said SO.
In reply we present the testimony of such
men as Kenrick, Dollipger, and the learned
authors of Janus, who agree with Dollinger
on this point although they differ on others.
These authorities deny that those writer's
support the idea of Papal infalliblity.
The reply to this is, here are number
Of quotations from those writer's, examine
them for yourself, if You are able, and
show If they are false; what is said by
Kenrick, Dollinger and Janus is only as
sertion here are the facts"
We offer a conclusive answer to this re-
ply:
1t would not be hard to sift the merits OF
the citations. For instance. the very first
sentance-that a disciple of Paul has so
taught-is notoriously a dodge it is
known to every Protestant writer that
there is Lo evidence that the so-called
Pastor, "of Hermas," was written by a
companion of Paul the Apostle.
But on points like this, we propose to set
Protestant testimony aside, and give the
clear and decided evidence of eminent an
thorities in the Roman Church itself. N2w,
in reply to the claim that the pretended
citations from the Fathers are facts, and
the denial of them is only assertions. The
case is simply this, the CATHOLIC MEssEN-
GER AND STAR. says, that SO called cita.
tious from the Fathers in support of the
idea of infallibility are fact: while suct
men as Keprick aud Dollinger say, tho!
, are not facts. Each one must judge fol
: himself which are the best authorities
RI These learned writer's even go 80 far as tt
i say, that commissioned teacher of the
q | Roman Church cannot assert Papal infalli
: bility, without perjuring himself, "For-
/ say they've have sworn to inteEpre
9 Scripture according to the unanimous con
f sent eff the Fathers, and the Fathers teacl
h no such doctrine"
: 4. To abate the force of this testimony
:. we are told that Kenrick has recaRted thes
!. not recant, has been exeommunicated
h But there seems to be SO little sympath.
n between KenTick and our Deighbors o.
: this question, that We must hesitate to &C
a cept their testimony as to his present Opin
!, ions Yet if it 10 90, the word of God who's
|. authority he so rsverently upheld, an
Z the facts of history which he 30 clear
= unfoided at the Vatical Council, they hdt
a not recGnted.
y 1t is perhaps true that the Pope has de
70 clared Dollinger hereto IL is also tTu
n that Dolinger has pronounced the Papac
l. of the Vatican Council heretical. Scrip
y ture, History, Reason and Tradition ga
d that Dollinger is right. TIE MoENIN
10 STAR AND CATHOLIC MESSENGERS says thu
,e the Papacy is right. Who is to decide
" 5. But Strossmayer, has not recantet
ie nor has he been excOmmunicated. In
,e speech in the Council, notable from it's eli
1s QaeDt vindicatton OF the Gaiiicao Churc
be he declared "papal iufallibIlity lie again
II the constitutions of the Church, the RICH
Of Bishous and Councils and the immnt,