THE POPE'S DECREE.

Waikato Times, Volume XXX, Issue 2479, 31 May 1888, Page 2

THE POPE'S DECREE.

TO TUB EDITOR.

Silt,—As I presume my critic Britannicus has to all intents and purposes given up the discussion on this most vexed question I, at least, have by no means exhausted my vocabulary in support of the negative side of the question. As a preface to the remarks which I am about to make, I beg to disabuse my opponent's mind of a misunderstanding under which he is at the present time labouring. lam not, nor ever was a priest, but I was educated with a view to that profession, though circumstances to which I need not here refer prevented me from corn piecing my studies. I, therefore, conceive myself perfectly acquainted with the laws of my Church, and I certainly will not yield to anyone in a matter which effects the liberty of thought, action, and speech of those ovnr whom the Pope has spiritual control. Britannicus has not advanced a single statement in support of his contention that the infallibility of the Pope has come within the scope of the tw j conditions named by me in my previous letter as embodying the articles under which we wish our faith to be proved. Th'ise conditions were ; first that such a doctrine should have been revoaled ; second that it be proposed by the Church; and of which two conditions if either be wanting, such doctrine is not of Catholic faith. Now as the second condition presupposes the first, all sensible and right thinking persons will admit that the Pope's claim to infallibility is an innovation which has never been revealed by the Church in as much as ■it is wanting in the very quality which wo Catholics freely admit the Church possesses. That most essential which is fatal to the Pope's claim is a liability on his part to error. Now, as the apostles were commissioned to teach only such truth as they had received from Christ, that is, what ho had revealed to them, so their successors in the ministry by virtue of the same commission, and under the >

direction of the same Di vino Spirit, should teach tho same, for it is by this the Catholic Church wishes its faith to bo proved, not by innovations. In conning over his letter and stripping it of all technicalities the whole of his arguments simply amount to this, that first he assumes the infallibility of the Church and the infallibility of the Tope to be one and the same thing. Second, he concludes that those who disbelieve the infallibility of the Pope cannot therefore believe in the infallibility of tho Church, and in consequence of which clis belief they ought to be put out. Truly, Mr Editor, I must say that a more fallacious and illogical conclusion no man could arrive at than that which my critic has devoted his literary efforts to arrive at after all his attempts to refute what he conceives to be iny turbulent spirit. Now let us look at the question in the strictest acceptation of the term in which infallibility is meant. Infallibility of faith means nothing more nor less than an absolute certainty on the part of the Catholic Church of being right in matters of faith. Take away this infallible certainty, and just see in what an anomalous predicament a Christian Church stands when deprived of it. Why, sir, the very edifice upon which the foundation of the Catholic Church rests would tumble to pieces and break into as many sects or creeds as there are days in the year, or like those of the reformed Churches, we would develop a decided predeliction in interpreting the Scriptures to our own confusion. Wo should then have the deplorable spectacle of every illiterato cobbler and blundering blacksmith exercising his ingenuity in preaching the (lospel from the depths of a cobbler's stall, or from the top of some sacred beer barrel and adopting most unbecoming titles by their absurd pretentions to holiness, making a mockery of religion by such abiurd and ridiculous capers as the Salvation Army are in tho habit of doing. This is in fact what would follow in the footsteps of any Christian Church deprived of its infallibility. But no such misfortune would overtake the Pope when deprived of that to which as a fallible man he has no claim. He still re mains the same Sovereign Pontiff and spiritual head of the Catholic Church as his predecessors were before him. And here I must revert to a statement in connection with my former letter which has brought another opponent into the discussion in the person of our respected parish priest. But the trio of critics which have sprung upon me so suddenly must have been aware that my remarks when defying Britannicus, or any other Catholic on the subject in dispute. did not mean any period within the last eighteen years but rather embracing the eighteen centuries which has passed over the Church without in anyway formulating a doctrine which has been repeatedly rejected by Pope and Council. An infallible Pope to be consistant with himself must say "(lod has revealed to me the fact that lam infallible in matters of faith and morals. I believe that such and such doctrines are divine truths. I am infallible, and therefore cannot err in teaching such doctrines, no matter how absurd or ridiculous they may appear to the senses." This now is the language which an infallihle I'ope to be consistent with himself inust teach. It it equally to be repudiated, then, when it attempts to fetter the speech, and actions of individuals. Liberty of conscionce, liberty of thought, is the undoubted right of every man on the face of God's earth, and lam not aware that tho Catholic Church is opposed thereto, but the infallibility of the Pope certainly is. And yet my critics claim to themselves the right to believe in anything they choose and pronounce an adverse judgment on all who refuse to accept of such doctrines. This I submit is not what Catholics have a right to expect from their ministers. There are so many things both in nature and revelation that are beyond the finito power of man's understanding, that it would bo presumption of the darkest character to expect that the powerful shall bind the powerless in thought, speech and action. Justice, not power, is what the Pope has a right to extend to Ireland. And right, not might; must be the word. How much the evil is aggravated if the Pope attempts to bind a man in things that concern the national interests of his country. Father Fox thinks I am misled about the teachings of the Catholic Church on the infallibility of the Pope. In that case all I have to say is, let the reverend gentleman take the matter u£>, I am perfectly willing to accept of his teaching if he can teach me any more about the matter than I already know ; and further, I defy Father Fox to disapprove the definition already given by me of the meaning of infallibility. I should not have taken up the subject had it not in the first place been for the animadversions of Britannicus. When persons take and charge a man with nonsense and absurdities, with heresy and selfcontradiction, you take a very wrong step towards putting him right. But totally different has been tho system which 1 have pursued, for I brought clear logical reason in support of my contention. To my opponent Britannicus, I would ask him to pause before again attacking the feelings or sentiments of Irishmen struggling for the liberation of their rights. Suppose you that her sons in these colonies cannot think? Think you they have no reason ? Have they no share in the revenue of the country ? Have you not for the past 88 years, since the Union, marked her dissatisfaction ? But even in her turbulence you may have perceived a lurking but stronc fondness for England. Conciliate her. Use her as your equal, and not as your bond slav e. Hold out to her the right hand of fellowship and chanty. (Jive her that civil and religious liberty which we in these colonies so greatly prize, and she will be your supporter in all national difficulties. Not from fear, but from love, will she serve you ; and thus the glory of our national constitution will be strengthened, and we shall be then prosperous, contented and happy. I may thus conclude by quoting tho old tag, Dulce et decomm est pro patria raori, leaving my opponents to make the bost they can of it.—l am, &c., Junius Hibkknicus.