Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1891-12-01

Z u,
! and the regulaS business. rs laid down on
| the published schedule, began; d3y after
| dav went By, and still nothing was / ard
officially, of the dogma. and even in the
| early days of March. 1870. no place had
| been assigned it in the work OF the body.
! Early il that month, however. it came 10
! light. Two petitions We're presented: one
( believed to come from the French clergy.
requesting that no new definitions Of
| faith, save such as We're absolutely ueces-
| Sary. should be made" the other, signed
by forty bishops, asking for q to....,'
definition of the pOpe'S infalibi,ity while in
the exercise o. his Office as teacher of the
church. On March i it was formally an
nounced that the pvrc had approved this
petition, and that a special provioi,.- - the
subject would be introduced into I con
stitutiCp ION the church Of Christ" The
scheme was now plain, and those among
the prelateS Who were opposed 10 the
eaunciation Of the dogma, believing il 10 be
untmelE, prepared for lis discussion.
DEFINITION OF THE DOGMA
As contained IL the constitution Pastor
4flternus of july Is, 1870, the dogma of pa
pal infallb!iity Is sufficiently explicit:
I'VE teach and define that il is a dogma di-
yinely revealed, that the Roman pontiff,
when he speaks eX caIhedra. that is. when
III DISCHARGE OF the Office Of pastor and doc
tor of all Christians, by virtue Of his SUI
l'tt-l4C ne NtLlt-tS - UtCl J4ltt lC'-
garllng faith ami morals 10 be held by the
universal church, by the divine assistance
promised to him IN blessed Peter. is pos
eessed of that infalIibility with wh.ci tlc
Divine Redeemer willed that his church
should be ,ldUwet for -tini"g doctrines
regarding faith and morals, and THAI. ,Iyre-
foe. such definitions of the homan poutjfS
are irreformable of themselves and not by
the consent of the church" In explanation
of his doctine it should re understood that
1t teaches the ihfailibility of the pOutif in
matters OF faith and morals only. in uues-
tons of politics, social or political economy,
he Is still liable TO err Nor is il as q man
hat ne is infallible, but as pope, and then
only when speaking III his Official capacity
as head of the church. As q private indi-
viGual, as a preachc". writer, theologiau,
temporal ruler or local bishop. he Is IS apt
to make mistakes As other mch; but rs
pope, ptonOuucinc en- opinion on matters of
faith and morals, he Is infaiiible. He
is diyinely guided, in his papal
decisions. by the assistance promised to
Peter and through him TO the eternal
church. The scriptural basis for this doc
triEe IS declared to be found in the words
of Christ, Luke xxi, % Il have prayed for
thee, that thy faith fan not: and wheel. thou
art converted, strengthen thy bretlreu;'
and also in Matthew xvi, Is, And | say
also unto thee. that thou art Per. and ON
this rock | viii Guild my church. and the
gates of hell shall not prevail against ="
Concerning his dogma, its defenders affirm
that it is:far from new, since 1t was ace
trine revealed by God delivered by h co..
slant tradition of the church. recognized in
ecumenIcal councils, pre-SuppOSed by the
acts Of the pontifTs in all ages, taught by
all the saints, defended by every religious
order and every theological school except Il
minority of the Gallican. and believed i'm
plicitly by all Catholics
THE ARCHBISHOP'S SPEECH.
A large number of pralates at once sent
in their names as DESTROYS of being heard on
the subject, ard in the general discussion
of the constitution sixty five members
spoke, most directing their remarks 10 the
question of iufalliJnIty: Thile in re special
discussion lfIy-SIN more expressed IL
views, more than one-half of the entire
number declaring their opinion that the
prHmulgatiO of the dogma was i"Jppor-
tune. Although o ,er f1rty bishops were
still to be ard, among them the arch
bishop of St. Louis, the majority deemed it
wise to close the discussion and dispense
with further debate. Archbishop keurick
had prepared a speech it was never deliv-
cred, but, being privately printed, was cir
culated, it is said, among the members Of
the council. Copies came into publicity;
the speech was translated from the original
Latin into several languages, and the docu-
ment itself is perfect cyclopedla of argu-
mert and referee. both historical and
dOctriral, against this famous dogma. In
the beginning of this unspOkeu orati I,
which the archbishop '1Us- i've felt 10 be
the supreme effort of his life, a., 9"fend
himself energetiCally AGAINST an at-Lcl.
made on him by the archbishop of Dublin,
who had assailed, with special seVv.i,s,
three points made in certain printed ''ob-
servations'' by Archbishop kendrick. -
III -. -,
mated by the name OF 'foun@n'ion
which was applied to Peter" e. That an
incorrect rea ling, which perverted the
truth of the passage, hal been given by the
archbishop to John, xxi, IL. g That the
word faith, rs found IN the New Tesla
ment, almost always meant trust or conf
dence, and did not apply to the whole body
of Christian doctrine. 20 the first OF these
objections he replies that while he acknowl-
edged that privilege was conferred on
Peter above the other apostles. which the
church has always recognized by acknowl-
edging ms primary. both OF honor and of
he denied that by virtue of the
word foundation the gift of infallibllity was
bestowed on Peter above the others, since
no mortal ever thought of claiming this
privilege for t. other apostles and their
successors from. the mere fact that they,
too, had been honored with the same title;
as to the second. he show that the arch
bishop OF Dublin has mistaken the meaning
Of the passage: and as to the third. Incl
dental to which the archbishop of Dublin
said his words smackcd &c the Calvanistic
heresy, he shows that in twenty-niue pas
sages in which the word faith occurs, in
only two can it be taken as having theo-
logical significance Us applied to tn" body
Of Christian doctrine.
STHOC ART PETER
Addressing himself especially to the solu-
ton of this famous text, the bulwarh OF the
papacy, the archbishop proceeded to dis
close its meaning with mastery command
Of language and power of argument that |
showed his resources both as u theologian
and debater. If the power given to the
apostles of preaching the gospel in the
whole earth, is to be restricted to them |
selves, although it was given by Christ TO |
continue to the end of tine world, it is i'm |
possible TO prove that the privilege, what !
ever it may have been, conferred on Peter |
n the words Thou art Peter etc, de- |
;cended to his successors, the popes." The !
question is of the power conferred on the |
ministry, and not specific sign of it such |
IS speaking with tongues or the working of !
miracles. Either the whole or none Of this |
lower descended. Whatever belonged to |
he sacred ministry in the time |
# Christ must belong to il /
always; therefore those privileges |
,ranted TO the apostles which concern the |
junction committed 10 them are the same as
low. 1.-THE apostolic college constituted a |
moral person, which is to continue 10 the
md of the world and whatever power
t now or the whole Christian re- |
igion falls to the ground. AS the |
bishops and clergy generally are the repre-
eutatiyes of the APOSTOLIC college, their !,