Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1881-06-20

as such would te required, and necessarily, O
the direct result of the promises all the infall
f bility belonging to the ordinary teaching c
the apostolate in its dispersed state would bt
long to this official act. Such official act
would have in our civil law their counterpart
in the decisions of the supreme court. In eC
clesiastical history they are called definitions
or solemn pronuncements of doctrine. max
references to terms and rules of civil law, be
cause these are familiar to you, and the teach
ing of the church, while lnfallible through
the guidance of the Holy Spirit, be
ing made through men as instruments, con
forms in its practical workings to the rules o
human reason, and it has in consequence mucl
similarity with the direct product OF rea
son, human law. And, indeed, we would un
derstand the church much more easily thai
We usually do if we once came to realize tina
God, being himself supreme reason, when ht
makes revelation to men, acts in the giving
and preservation of this revelation according
to the dictates of reason or common sense.
Well, when in the church, the official act o
the corporate body of teachers Is demanded
who will speak? The answer is already II
your mnds-it is the chief judge,
THE HEAD OF THE CORPORATION.
When Christ instituted the apostolate he gave
it a center of unity, a headship. Peter was
appointed the prince of the apostles, the chief
tain over the whole church, and as the infalli
BILE church of Christ is seen through the dis
tant scenes of past history, teaching the world
in Christ's name, the successor of Peter, the
bishop of Rome, ever looms up before
the eye of the observer, as the supreme shep
herd of the entire fold, guiding with his pas.
toral staff shepherds and focks, bishops and
peoples The hierarchcal constitution of the
| infalllbile church decides at once the question
of papal infallibility. The doctrine lies at the
very root of the church's constitution. Given
an infallible church whose body of teachers
are under one supreme leader, the infallibility
| of that leader, when he speaks for the church,
is necessity. Could he fail, he leads the
whole church astray, as the church will fol-
| low his directions. If elsewhere in the church
| lies the power of controlling his teaching, then
elsewhere, TOO, lies the supremacy, and
| the pope is no longer the head of the hierar
chy.
THE VATICAN DEFINITION
of papll infallibility reads as follows
'tWe teach and define that it is dogma di-
vinely revealed that the Roman pontiff, when
he speaks er cathedra, that is when in dis
charge of the office of pastor and doctor of
all Christians, by virtue of his supreme apos-
tolc authority he defines doctrine regarding
faith or morals to be held by
the divine assistance promised to him
in blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibl-
ity with which the divine Redeemer willed
that his church should be endowed for defin-
ing doctrine regarding faith or morals, and
that therefore such definitions of the Roman
pontiff are irreformable of themselves, and not
from the consent of the church,
You will note with me the nature and con-
dtions of papal infallibility, as expressed in
4La laGn o,,1 tri1I oh ha hor
mony of these conditions with the general
idea and purposes of infalllbility in the church.
Through the divine assistance promised to
him in blessed Peter" Through no natural
gift of his own, not through his
learning, or his superior genius, is the
pope infallible, but through the divine assist
ance. AS teacher this assistance is prom
ised to him. 1t is gift belonging to his Of
flee, bestowed upon him not for his sake, but
in favor of the church which he represents,
and which 1t is his mission to instruct. Out,
side of his office he is abandoned to his own
intellectual resources, and in his moral life he
falls or stands according as by his own free
will he corresponds, or not, with divine grace.
He Is infallIble when teaching "faith or NOR
ais" that is when expounding the revelation
of Christ. The commission included but this
revelation. "All things whatsoever have said
unto you,' and beyond this Christ's assistance
as "pastor and doctor of all Christians he de-
fines doctrine to be held by the universal
church, in virtue of his supreme apostolic au-
thority." The pope in becoming pope does not
cease to have his own private opinions, in
which, like any other man, he may be right or
wrong, and so long as he is putting forth his
own opinions he is falllhle. Only when speak
ing er cathedra does he become invested with
the divine guidance promised to the church.
This word er cathedra IMPLIES two things
that he addresses the whole church, and that
he has the intention to oblige the church, in
virtue of his supreme authority to give inte-
rior assent to his teaching. The pope re-
mains fallible in books which he may write,
in his private letters, in rescrpts and disciplin-
ary regulations wherein, as teacher, he imposes
upon the church no doctrine, even if in these
set forth doctrinal opinions, or make incident
al doctrinal statements. AS bishop of Rome
dealing with the affairs of his
own immediate diocese, he is not
infallible. To Peter, as shepherd OF the entire
fold, Is the assistance promised and given.
These conditions of infallbility are well I'M
derstood by Catholics, who have no difficulty
in knowing when a pope's utterances are TO
| be considered or not as nfallible. They are in
no way arbitrary; they have as basis the dis
| junction existing in the pope between the man
and the office.
| have given you the Catholic statement of
| the doctrine of papal infallibility. As under
stood by Catholics it Is necessarily implied in
the teaching office of the church; 1t is more
| than mere point of doctrine-it is an essential
element of the church's life and constitution.
1t has been solemnly affirmed by the late Yati-
can council. With it the church stands or
falls. We now come to the
OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE DOCTRINE,
contained in Mr.. Smiths discourses. Mr..
Smith presents objections as many and as
strong as it is well possible to do. He has
objections purely Of his own discovery, which
are mere misrepresentation of the doctrine,
but to these he has, wisely for his cause, adj
ded objections worthy of some notice from
two well-known and learned opponents of the
doctrine-Mr. Gladstone of England, and the
| author of the book entitled "Janus," sup
posed to be Doellinger of Munich.
Mr.. Smith finds in the doctrine itself reason
for its rejection. at needs but to be stated y
he SAYS, "to be refuted. Consider the spectacle:
A man of like weakness with ourselves, swayed
by the same passions, liable to fall into mani.
fold sins, coming forward to assert his right
to proclaim dogmatically all religious truth. y
Mr.. Smiths statement of the doctrine would
indeed, refute it; but Mr.. Smiths statement is
| mere play of his fancy. The Catholic adds
to this statement the very important words
Through the divine assistance which
has been promised to the church,
and the question changes at once. Will it b.
denied that God can, IN given circumstances
render man infallible? Mr.. Smith, hope
still clings to the inspiration of the scripture
here are men, "of like weakness with our
selves, swayed by the same passions, liable t.
fall into manifold SINS" David and Solomon
for instance admitted by him to be infallible
WHY NOT Plus TX, OR LEO XIII?
If Mr.. Smith had proved that Christ did no
establish an infallible body of teachers, h
might lefute our doctrine by mere statemen
of it.
"Why are the pope's definitions" continue
Mr.. Smith, "to be regarded? Because give
|