The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1872-01-14

bility Of the Pope by the assistance OF tue
Holy Ghost 10, loquens er cathedrGr IN mat :. !,
tefs Of faith and morals, and always y
been, included In Catholic faith, or this
doctrine of the Church. Consequently. 1t
has never been lawful to deny it, and Gal
licanism was, in fact, always heresy; what
never have been asserted without incurring
in foro conseienti@, the guilt Of heresy, I'M
less excused by invincible ignorance; bu
not in the exterior forum, because prior to
the 18th of July, 1870, there was no canon
Of the Church explicitly condemning IT,
plicitly sooner, she has told US, and we
have no right to ask her for her reasons.
Possibly her reasons are prudential, IKE
those of the bishops who in tine Council OF
the Vatican opposed, not the doctrine, put
the definition. She has thought it best 30
obeyed the Papal Constitution, to leave
them In good faith, and not to change their
material heresy into formal heresy. MT:
Walworth does not appear to he aware OF
the distinction between material heresy ana
formal, but seems to suppose that there Is
Church has explicitly aud formally defined
to be dc Jide, and as no definitions are made
of any article or proposition of faith till 1T
is controverted, we see not, if his SUPPOSE
ton be true, how there can ever be either
faith or heresy. On his theory an infalli6le
and Interchangeable Church could never de-
eide any controversy.
Archbishop Purcell opposed the defni-
ton in the Council, as did u number OF
other prelates, as inopportune, inexpedi.
ent, or unnecessary. not the doctrine itself.
Mr.. Walworth, by his own principles OF the
Catholicity he accepted when he conformed
to the Church. is bound to accept Papal in
fa1l for ~
that the Iinfallibility of the Church is ex-
pressed by General Councils, and this def
milton is certainly made in a General Coun-
ellis. TIE attempt to evade this by contend
ing that the definition was not made by the
free action of the assembled bishops, that
they were even forced by the Pope. and
intrigues and factions proceedings of the
Jesuits, to make it, is perfectly idle, and to
forget that General Councils are guided
and assisted by the Holy Ghost. The Pope
exercised no restraint but such as Popes
have always exercised over General Coun-
ellis, far less than some of them, st. Greg
Ory X, for instance, in the Second General
trigues of the Jesuits were not, ut worst,
more effective than the influence Of the
Emperor Marcian, and the Imperial Court
ut Chalcedon. All definition in General
Councils are usually made by the Pope,
who presides in person, the Sacred Council
0ppAOFiuSS huu uO dCSo VI d AOubCiA uoO
approved by the Pope have any legal value,
for the Churchsis Papal, not simply Epis-
copal. If the Council of the Vatican was
not Gcumepical, there never was an ecu
meaical Council, and if the definition of
Papal infallibility is invalid, no act Of any
Council can be proved to be valid and bind
ing on the faithful.
MIR. Walworth says DR.. Dollinger is right,
and of course, the Pope and Council are
wrong, and as o brave man aud "free
American citizen, he will stand by him and
the Alt Katholiks.V But we would remind
him that he cannot do SO, and still pretend
even to belong to the old Catholic Church.
erned by the Pope, and bishops, and more
over, has always, since St. Peter erected
his chair in the city of Rome, recognized
| the Roman Church as the "mistress and
mother of all the churches" Your Alt
Katholiks do not recognize the authority of
the Roman Church they have neither
Pope nor bishops, and no means or authori-
ty to reproduce either, and they are and
can be at best only Presbyterians, not 80
much even a. Eptscopalians. Besides DR..
Dollinger holds, what is certainly an inno-
walton, that the Church, even Popes and
Councils, N ust be governed by body OF
learned and scientific men, thus making
the Church q purely human institution,
depending on the wisdom, sagacity and
learning of University professors. Does
Mr.. Walworth say be is right in thisf If
he does, what right has he to call himself
an "O!d Catholici" -Dollinger is
neither an old Catholic nor q new Catholic,
for he is simply no Catholic at all, since he
virtually denies the supernatural guidance
and assistance of the Holy Ghost. Does
Mr.. Walworth do the same7 Places he no
faith in the promises of Our Lord to His
Churchf
Mr.. Walworth must pardon US for sug-
Ooatiu0 thot rOaai hlo hot ho haa in his
haste to assert his freedom as free born
American citizen, not duly considered the
position in which he has placed himself.
He has renowned and denounced the Ca
tholic Church, and in 80 doing he has de-
MED that God has any Church on earth, or
that man has any means of salvation. He
has deprived himself of house and home.
Will he return to Professionalism But the
Professionals sects are none of them any bet
ter than they were, and he has all the rea-
sons for leaving them that he had when he
originally left them. Build q new Church 2
Man is no Church builder, and man made
Church would be no protection in this
bleak and wintry world. We see nothing