Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

14 THE BULLETIN OF THE CATHOLIC LAYMEN’S ASSOCIATION OF GEORGIA CATHOLICS AND THE POPE Continued from Page 2. “When is he infallible?” Only when he speaks ex Cathedra; that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith and morals, to be held by the whole Church. In such a case, it was declared by the Vatican Council, “The Roman Pontiff is, by reason of the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining faith and morals.” Thus, the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals only, when speaking ex cathedra only and to that extent only to which our Lord wished His Church to be infallible in defining faith and morals. The Pope is not the Church, any more than the Chief Justice of the United States is the Supreme Court; but just as under certain circumstances pre scribed by our Federal Constitution and statutes, the Chief Justice is the Voice of the Court, so under certain circumstances determined by Canon Law and the constitution of the Church, the Pope is the Voice of the Church, and in such case he is possessed of that infallibility with which our Lord wished His Church to be endowed in order that the gates of Hell would never prevail against it. The Pope speaks as the Voice of the Church when he speaks ex cathedra, which are two words meaning “from the chair”; but they should not be taken to mean that the Pope need only mount a step, take a seat and open his lips, in order to constitute the Church speaking; any more than the Chief Justice without any preliminary can step up to the Bench and fire away making laws under the claim that he is the Court speaking. Whether or not in a given case the Pope is speaking as the Voice of the Church and in the exercise of the Infallible Magisterium of faith and morals, may be an intricate, delicate and involved question, although usualy simple and plain, the same as whether or not the Chief Justice is speak ing as the Voice of the Court and in the exercise of the Supreme Magisterium of Justice. It is not every one but only those who are versed in the constitution of the Church and know canon law, who can say whether or not this or that particular utterance of a Pope is of infallible authority. When the Chief Justice renders an opinion, nol everything he says is law; the decision only is law. His argument, citations of authority, references to history, and the like, are not law; the definite judg ment of the Court only is law. So, when the Pope by virtue of his Supreme Apostolic authority defines a doctrine of faith and morals to be held by the whole Church the definition only is infallible, not the reason given or the argument made in connection. Finally, just as the Chief Justice does not make law but merely decides what is law, so the Pope does nol make doctrinal truth, but merely defines what is doctrinal truth, speaking as the Voice of the Church which St. Paul said is “the pillar and ground of truth.” One other word here seems not improper. No doctrine of the Church is new. Nothing is ever added to the deposit of revealed truth which it is the mission of Christ’s Church on earth to teach mankind. Christ said: “Teach all nations; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded” (Matt XXVIII, 19); and of those things St. John says: “If they should be written everyone, I suppose even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written” (John XXI, 25). But again Christ said: “The Holy Ghost shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever I have said” (John XIV, 26). Thus, while Christ gave His Church a mission that was humanly impossible, He promised her a special divine assistance in its performance. He did not promise to reveal to her additional truths. He did not promise to inspire her so that she herself could reveal addi tional truths. He promised a special divine assist ance to enable her to teach all things whatsoever he had commanded which, multitudinous as they were, without divine assistance would have been impossible. When the Pope ex cathedra defines a doctrine of faith and morals, he but restates a truth which Christ Him self explicitly or implicitly taught, which the Church has preserved in scripture and tradition, by canon or custom, and which is now for the first time seriously confounded with error. The Church from time to time may adopt new policies, make new rules and regulations; but Catholic doctrine is the “Faith once delivered to the Saints”, to which nothing can be added and from which nothing can be taken forever. “Does the Pope claim any temporal rights ir America?” . He does not. “Do Catholics in America owe him any political allegiance?” No. “Do Catholics believe that the Pope can nullify laws, oaths or contracts at his pleasure?” No. Catholics in Georgia have many things to be thank ful for, not the least of which is the absence of that type of Catholic professional and business man who knows more about matters of faith and morals, canon law and other subjects within the scope of the clergy than the members of the clergy who have spent a life time to acquire a knowledge of them. The con fidence of such men usually varies inversely with the square of their knowledge. The lives of the late Cardinal Gibbons and the late Very Rev. John Pius Murphy, 0. P., P. G., provincial of the Dominican order on the Pacific Coast, both of whom died at about the same time, emphasize the democracy of the Church. Cardinal Gibbons began life as a grocer’s boy; the Dominican provincial was San Francisco’s first newsboy.