INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 16, 25 October 1871, Page 3

INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

To the Editor of THE THAMES GUARDIAN. Sir, —lf it is not trespassing on your space too much the following will, no doubt, be of great interest now that we have a champion in our midst for the doctrine of the Papal Infallibility. The dogma, as defined in the Schema De Vide, runs thus :—“ It is a doctrine of Divine revelation that the Roman Pontiff, when speaking ex cathedra , i.e., in fulfilment of his office as supreme pastor and teacher of all Christians, and proclaiming by virtue of his Divine and apostolic authority an article of faith or morality for the acceptance of the whole Church, is clothed, through God’s promise to St. Peter, with the same Infallibility which the Divine Redeemer chose to confer on His Church. Wherefore the teaching of the said Roman PoDtiff is from its very nature infallible.”

Among the minority of eighty six who voted against the dogma were Cardinals Slatlilcuj XXatiolicij Uiu Archbishop of Paris and Grenoble, with many other notable names in the Romish Church. One of the remonstrant prelates said at the Council, “All religion is at an end in Bohemia if this definition is affirmed.” The following suggestive sentences are from Cardinal Schwartzenberg's noble pamphlet:—“ He who exalts himself shall be abased.” In the days of Boniface VIII the Papacy sought to raise itself above all civil authorities, and it -was miserably degraded as a temporal power. At the present time it seeks to set itself above every other spiritual power. It will be spiritually cast down, creating at the same time an abyss between the Church and society. Dr. Dollinger, Professor of Dogmatic Theology in the University of Munich, by far the most able and influential theologian in the Romish Church in Europe or America, asks to be heard in full before the coming Council of German Bishops at Palda on the five following points : 1. That the texts of Scripture on which the doctrine of Papal infallibility is based do not, when rightly interpreted, teach any such doctrine, and have never by the unanimous consent of the Church been sp understood.

2. That the assertions so confidently and authoritatively made, that the claim to Papal autocracy End infallibility has existed from the beginning of the Church, proceed on a complete misrepresentation

of her history and traditions for the first thousand years, and are glaringly contrary to undoubted facts. 3. That the text-hooks which were disseminated at Rome during the Synod, and which are in use in Italy, France, and and Spain are fraudulent and corrupt. 4. That two General Councils of the fifteenth century, confirmed by several Popes, have directly otherwise pronounced on the question of infallibility. 5. That Hie new decrees are incompatible with the Constitutions of the States of Europe, and specifically with that of Bararia, which, as a Councillor of State, he has sworn to observe. These are Dollinger’s theses. He proposes to put the Council on its trial before the Romish Bishops of Germany ; and if he should get a fair hearing, farewell to the influence of the Pope in Germany. In a letter addressed to the Archbishop of Munich, Dr. Dollinger says This power (the infallibility dogma) is unlimited and irresponsible; it extends wherever there is sin, and can punish any one, allows no appeal, and is simply sovereign ; for the Pope, according to the saying of Boniface VIII. (the author of the Unam Sanctaw .), holds all rights in his breast. Now he has become infallible he can in a moment, by the little word orbi (i.e., by declaring that he speaks to the whole church) make any maxim, doctrine, or requisition, and infallible and irreformable article of faith. No right, no personal or corporate freedom hold good against him ; or, as the Canonists say, the judgment seat of God and the Pojie is one and the same.” He goes on to say :—“As a Christian, a theologian, a historical student, and a citizen, I cannot receive the doctrine. I would ask when the subject is thought over and carried to its logical conclusions—who can ?” —I am, &c., Liberty. [We think this subject has been sufficiently discussed. —Ed. T.G. ]