Sayfadaki görseller
PDF
ePub

determination to which we must inviolably adhere, put an end to doubts which arise concerning the Catholic faith; and that whatsoever he, by the authority of the keys delivered to him by Christ, determines to be true, is true and Catholic; and what he determines to be false and heretical is to be so esteemed ?'*

In the above passages we have infallibility personal, absolute, independent, without the Apostles, without the College of Cardinals, alone, apart from the Church, separate from Councils and from Bishops.

I am not aware of any modern writer who has used language so explicit and fearless.

We will now ascertain the scholastic meaning of these terms; and we shall see that they are in precise accordance with the definition of the Council.

You need not be reminded, Reverend and dear Brethren, of the terminology of Canonists in treating the subject of privileges.

A privilege is a right, or faculty bestowed upon persons, places, or things.

Privileges therefore are of three kinds, personal, real, and mixed.†

A personal privilege is that which attaches to the person as such.

A real privilege attaches either to a place, or to a thing, or to an office.

* 'Si credidisti et adhuc credis solum Romanum Pontificem, dubiis emergentibus circa fidem catholicam posse per determinationem authenticam cui sit inviolabiliter adhærendum, finem imponere et esse verum et Catholicum quidquid ipse auctoritate clavium sibi traditarum a Christo determinat esse verum; et quod determinat esse falsum et hæreticum sit censendum.'-Baronius, tom. xxv. ad ann. 1351, p. 529. Lucca, 1750.

† Reiffenstuel. Tit. de Privileg. lib. v. 34, 12.

it

A mixed privilege may be both personal and real; also attach to a community or body of persons, University, or a College, or a Chapter.

may

The primacy, including jurisdiction and infallibility, is a privilege attaching to the person of Peter and of It is therefore a personal privilege

his successors.

in the Pontiffs.

It is personal, as Toletus says, because it cannot be communicated to others. It is not a real privilege attached to the See, or Cathedra, or Church of Rome, and therefore to the person; but to the person of the Roman Pontiff, and therefore, to the See.

It is not a mixed privilege, attaching to the Pontiff, only in union with a community or body, such as the Episcopate, congregated or dispersed; but attaching to his person, because inherent in the primacy, which he alone personally bears.

The use of the word personal is therefore precise and correct, according to the scholastic terminology; not, indeed, according to the sense of newspaper theologians. Theology, like chancery law, has its technical language; and the common sense of Englishmen would keep them from using it in any other meaning.

[ocr errors]

In this sense it is that the Dominican theologian De Fiume says, There are two things .. in Peter: one personal, and another public; as Pastor and Head of the Church. Some things therefore belong to the person of Peter alone, and do not pass to his successors; as the saying, Get thee behind me Satan... and the like. Some, again, are spoken of him as a public person, and by reason of his office

as supreme Head and Pastor of the Universal Church, as, Feed My sheep, &c.'*

Therefore, infallibility is the privilege of Peter not as a private person, but as a public person holding the primacy over the Universal Church.

[ocr errors]

In the Pastoral addressed to you so long ago as the year 1867, this was pointed out in the unmistakable words of Cardinal Sfondratus. The Pontiff,' he says, 'does some things as a man, some things as a prince, some as doctor, some as Pope, that is, as head and foundation of the Church; and it is only to these (last-named) actions that we attribute the gift of infallibility. The others we leave to his human condition. As then not every action of the Pope is papal, so not every action of the Pope enjoys the papal privilege.'†

The value therefore of this traditional language of the schools is evident.

When the infallibility of the Pontiff is said to be personal, it is to exclude all doubt as to the source from which infallibility is derived; and to declare

* 'Duo namque sunt in Petro. Unum personale et aliud publicum, ut Pastor et caput Ecclesiæ. Quædam ergo tantummodo personæ Petri conveniunt, ad successores non transeunt; ut quod dicatur: Vade post me, Satana, et similia. Quædam vero dicuntur de eo quatenus est persona publica, et ratione officii Supremi Capitis et Pastoris Ecclesiæ universalis; ut Pasce oves meas, &c.'— Ignatius de Fiume, Schola veritatis orthodoxæ, apud Bianchi, de Constitutione Monarchica Ecclesiæ, p. 88. Rome, 1870.

Pontifex aliqua facit ut homo, aliqua ut Princeps, aliqua ut Doctor, aliqua ut Papa, hoc est ut caput et fundamentum Ecclesiæ : et his solis actionibus privilegium infallibilitatis adscribimus: alias humanæ conditioni relinquimus: sicut ergo non omnis actio Papæ est papalis, ita non omnis actio Papæ papali privilegio gaudet.'Sfondrati, Regale Sacerdotium, lib. iii. sec. 1.

that it is not a privilegium mixtum inherent in the Episcopate, or communicated by it to the head of the Church; but a special assistance of the Spirit of Truth attaching to the primacy, and therefore to the person who bears the primacy, Peter and his successors; conferred on them by Christ Himself for the confirmation of the Church in faith.

2. Next, as to the term separate. The sense in which theologians have used this term is obvious. They universally and precisely apply it to express the same idea as the word personal; namely, that in the possession and exercise of this privilege of infallibility the successor of Peter depends on no one but God. The meaning of decapitation, decollation, and cutting off, of a headless body, and a bodiless head, I have hardly been able to persuade myself, has ever, by serious men, at least in serious moods, been imputed to such words as separatim, seorsum, or seclusis Episcopis.

My reason for this doubt is, that such a monstrous sense includes at least six heresies; and I could hardly think that any Catholic would fail to know this, or, knowing it, would impute it to Catholics, still less to Bishops of the Church.

The words seorsum, &c., may have two meanings, one obviously false, the other as obviously true.

The former sense would be disunion of the head from the body of the Episcopate and the faithful, or separation from Catholic communion; the latter, an independent action in the exercise of his supreme office. And first of the former:

1. It is de fide, or matter of faith, that the head of

the Church, as such, can never be separated, either from the Ecclesia docens, or the Ecclesia discens; that is, either from the Episcopate or from the faithful.

To suppose this, would be to deny the perpetual indwelling office of the Holy Ghost in the Church, by which the mystical body is knit together; the head to the Body, the Body to the head, the members to each other; and to 'dissolve Jesus,'* that is, to destroy the perfect symmetry and organisation which the Apostle describes as the body of Christ; and St. Augustine speaks of as 'one man, head and body, Christ and the Church a perfect man.'† On this unity all the properties and endowments of the Church depend; indefectibility, unity, infallibility. As the Church can never be separated from its invisible Head, so never from its visible head.

2. Secondly, it is matter of faith that the Ecclesia docens or the Episcopate, to which together with Peter, and as it were, in one person with him, the assistance of the Holy Ghost was promised, can never be dissolved; but it would be dissolved if it were separated from its head. Such separation would destroy the infallibility of the Church itself. The Ecclesia docens would cease to exist; but this is impossible, and without heresy cannot be supposed.

3. Thirdly, it is also matter of faith that not only no separation of communion, but even no disunion of doctrine and faith between the Head and the Body,

* St. John iv. 3, 'Omnis spiritus qui solvit Jesum,' &c.

† 'Unus homo caput et corpus, unus homo Christus et Ecclesia vir perfectus.'-S. Augustin. In Psalm xviii. tom. iv. p. 85, 86, ed. Ben. Paris, 1681.

« ÖncekiDevam »