Newspaper Page Text
8
THE BULLETIN OF THE CATHOLIC LAYMEN’S ASSOCIATION OF GEORGIA
the approval of the President, yet if the supreme court
decided that the law or measure was in contraven
tion of the Constitution of the United States the law
or measure would be void and of no effect. No
loyal American for a moment feels that his liberty
is taken away by this fact. No one thinks that every
word of a judge partakes of a judicial character. It
is only when in his official character he decides a
question or defines a law is his word to be considered
as an official utterance. Why cannot our Protestant
friends apply this to the actions of the Pope?
The Protestant minister whose sermon was the oc
casion of the visit paid me by the lady who desired
information on the subject of papal infallibility said
it was a question between an “Infallible Book and an
Infallible Pope.” The term infallibility is scarcely
one which can with grammatical accuracy be applied
to a book. But I will not discuss that point. It might
be permitted, however, for me to notice in passing
his references to the Bible as the God-given guide
to all men. Now the Bible is called the guide to sal
vation. A guide is one who knows and shows to all
the path in which they should walk as a means of
reaching the end desired. Most Protestants believe
that salvation is only possible through the merits and
the passion of Christ. Now it is well known that a
very considerable number of educated men use the
Bible and flatly deny the divinity of Christ and the
atonement through His Blood. There must be some
thing wrong somewhere. I freely admit the divine
inspiration of Cod s 5Vord, but to me it is supremely
foolish to assert that every Tom, Dick and Harry
may interpret it as he pleases. The Book is God’s
Word. It tells one truth. It must not be held respon
sible for the contradictory and ridiculous interpreta
tions foisted on it by private judgment of incompe
tent men.
But let us return to the question of Infallibility of
the Pope. The efficient cause of Papal Infallibility
is the explicit promise made by Christ to Peter and
his successors. This explicit promise made by Christ
is found recorded in the twenty-second chapter of St.
Luke, and the 31st and 32d verses: “I have prayed
for thee that thy faith fail not, and thou being once
converted confirm thy brethren.” This power was
implicitly conferred by the promise made to the same
Peter by Christ (Matt. XVI-18): “Thou art Peter
and upon this Rock 1 will build My Church and the
gates of Hell shall not prevail against it, and to thee
I will give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and
whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth it shall be bound
in Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth
it shall be loosed also in Heaven.”
To me it seems quite clear that in the “Infallible
Book we find Christ, who came to sav4 all men, in-
stittued the Church to carry on His work; that of
this Church He made Peter the chief support or
foundation; that the Church is "the pillar and the
ground of truth”; (I Tim. 111-15) that those who hear
the Church hear Christ Himself, and those who de
spise it despise Him (Luke X-16); that he who does
not believe its teaching will be condemned by Christ
(Matt.-XVIII 17-20); that Christ is to be with the
teaching Church always (Matt. XXVIII-20) ; that
Christ delivered Himself up for the Church (1 Cor.
V-7) ; that the power of evil shall never prevail against
it (Matt. XVI-1 8). Now Peter is the sure foundation
of it, and did He fail, the Church itself would fail.
But Christ especially prayed that Peter’s faith would
not fail and bade him confirm all the rest- of the
apostles (Luke XX1I-31), that Peter was commanded
by Christ to teach both sheep and lambs, or all the
flock of Christ (John XXI-15-16).
Now after these words of the "Infallible Book,” I
ask: Are we bound to listen and obey when Peter
speaks? If you say “yes,” then Peter is infallible.
If you say no," then Christ is not God, for He has
deceived us. Let me put the question this way: If
the Church was established by Christ to “teach all
things that He had commanded,” and if Christ made
Peter the Supreme Teacher of all the flock, then Peter,
on account of Christ s promise and command, could
not teach error, but must faithfully keep and teach
the truth commanded by Christ. But Christ did
make him the Supreme Teacher and did promise that
Peter s faith should not fail; therefore, Peter was in
fallible.
It is true that our Lord had prayed for Peter espe-
cially that his faith should not fail (Luke XXII-31),
then he did not fail; if Peter was bidden confirm in their
faith the others, it was because he was constituted by
Christ Pastor of all. But he could not teach all, as
ordered by Christ, unless he was assured of freedom
from error. Therefore, Peter was infallible. This in
fallibility is not an accidental quality, but is essential
to the Church. She was constituted by Christ a
teaching body, to endure forall time and all the essen
tial gifts and powers conferred upon her by Christ
are, and must ever remain, with her. Hence, the
infallibility of Peter descends to his legitimate suc
cessors. Hence Papal Infallibility.
Now we Catholics are most firmly persuaded that
the “Infallible Book” clearly and most unmistakably
does teach that Christ gave to Peter and his suc
cessors this gift of infallibility. Our friends remem
bering their “God-given right of private judgment”
cannot object when the most numerous Christian body
in the world says the doctrine is in the “Infallible
Book"; and, moreover, that it is clearly expressed
therein.
The good minister’s statement that Infallibility of
the Pope is a blasphemy as vesting in a man a power
which only belongs to God, brings to mind the story
told of the man to whom our Lord said he must be
of good heart because his sins were forgiven him.
The first century Pharisees were scandalized at a
mere man pretending to forgive sins. Our Lord per
formed a miracle to show that the son of man, not
the Son of God, could forgive sins. And, in fact,
Christ did give this power to His Apostles.
The minister declared that Papal Infallibility was
only proclaimed in 1870, and hence is a new doctrine,
and that the Pope, in virtue of this declaration, might
define some manifest error as a truth, and all Cath-