Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    November 29, 1894

    “The Infallibility of the Pope” The Present Truth 10, 48, pp. 758, 759.

    ATJ

    WHERE DOES IT COME FROM? AND HOW DOES HE GET IT

    IN order to answer these questions more fairly and fully, let us see what is the exact statement of the claim as officially and “infallibly” pronounced. Here it is:—PTUK November 29, 1894, page 758.1

    Wherefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, for the glory of God our Saviour, the exaltation of the Catholic religion, and the salvation of the Christian people, we, the sacred council, approving, teach, and define that it is a dogma divinely revealed; that the Roman pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra—that is, when discharging the office of pastor, and teacher of all Christians, by reason of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the whole church—he, by the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possesses that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed the His church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals; and that, therefore, such definitions of the said Roman pontiff are of themselves unalterable and not from the consent of the church.PTUK November 29, 1894, page 758.2

    Consequently, Catholics believe that the Pope is infallible when he teaches the faithful ex cathedra, that is, “from the chair” of St. Peter, in matters of faith or morals.—Catholic Belief, p. 69.PTUK November 29, 1894, page 758.3

    From this it is seen that there is no claim that infallibility attached to the Pope except when he speaks “ex cathedra, that is, from the chair of St. Peter;” and he speaks “ex cathedra” only when he speaks (a) “as the father and doctor of all Christians;” (b) “discharging the office of pastor and teacher of all Christians;” (c) and then only as he speaks on a question of faith or morals. That is to say: If he speaks or writes only as a priest, a bishop, or a theologians, he is not claimed to be infallible, nor is that which is so spoken or written claimed to be infallibly true. If he speaks about the weather or the crops, or the loss of his temporal power, or politics generally, or his great “love for Protestants”—in none of this is it claimed that infallibility attaches to him or anything that he says.PTUK November 29, 1894, page 758.4

    From the dogma itself it is perfectly clear that it is not claimed that infallibility attaches to the man at all, who happens to be a Pope, but that it attaches to the Pope who happens to be a man. For instance, Joachim Pecci happened to become a Pope. When he was just plain Joachim Pecci and nothing else, no hint of a claim of infallibility ever attached to him. And if he had always remained plain Joachim Pecci no hint of any such thing, in the mind of anybody, would have ever attached to him. When he became “Father Pecci,” a priest, it was the same way; when he became Bishop Pecci, it was the same way; when he became Archbishop Pecci, it was still the same way; and when he became Cardinal Pecci it was yet the same way—in none of these positions was any thought of infallibility ever connected with him in the mind of anybody. And if he had always remained in any one of these positions, no thought of infallibility ever would have been connected with him.PTUK November 29, 1894, page 758.5

    It is perfectly plain, then, that outside of the office of Pope there is no thought of infallibility connected with the man who happens to become Pope. As priest, or bishop, or archbishop, or cardinal, no vestige of it attaches to him in the mind of anybody. Yet it was by a vote of 363, against two, bishops, archbishops, and cardinals, that the doctrine was established that infallibility does attach to him when he happens to become Pope. This, too, while not one of the 363 made any kind of claim of infallibility on his own part!PTUK November 29, 1894, page 758.6

    In this, therefore, we are treated to the absurd suggestion that 363 elements of absolute fallibility could infallibly settle the doctrine that infallibility is connected with one of their own absolutely fallible selves when he happens to be made Pope!—No, this is not quite the full statement of the case yet; for when the 363 had voted it, it was not infallibly fixed until the Pope had ex cathedra proclaimed it. That is to say, the 363 fallibles voted it infallibly so, then he of whom, till this, it was not infallibly so, proclaimed it infallibly so, and thus it became infallibly so. In other words, 363 fallibles voted his infallibility when he speaks ex cathedra; but this could not be infallibly certain till he himself had infallibly proclaimed it; and he could not infallibly proclaim it until it was infallibly so! Like produced totally unlike. Out of nothing SOMETHING CAME!PTUK November 29, 1894, page 759.1

    A. T. JONES.

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents