Letter#56   Infallibility of the Pope

 

My dear Mr. Isaacs:
   A request came to me two weeks ago to dine and sit in with a group of Jews, Harvard students, who were to discuss religion, to which I responded.
   They, all strangers to me, were moved by a discussion of my "Jewish Panorama" to have me "add spice to the con-fab." All eyes were centered upon me, often more than their ears, as never before had they met such a strange thing as a "Goldstein-Catholic," to quote one of them. They knew not that there was a family of eight Baltimore Goldsteins and a New Hampshire Goldstein of artistic musical skill in the Church, and that a lady who had that precious name is doing service as a Dominican Nun. It was a hard night's work, as their questions and objections seemed to cover almost the whole gamut of things Catholic. While some of them were skeptical about this, and others about that, they all seemed to scorn belief in the infallibility of the pope, as do you.
   Keen though these young men were, they had a doctrinal concept of infallibility that was as far from the Catholic concept of it as was that of the youngster I heard of recently, though not as humorous.

Youngster :  "Mother, I wouldn't be a Catholic for anything."
Mother :  "Why, my dear?"
Youngster :  "I don't believe the pope is God."
Mother :  "Why, my boy, I do not think Catholics believe that."
Youngster :  "Well, anyway, I heard a Catholic boy say that
         the pope is inflammable."

While the students did not believe the pope to be inflammable, the discussion of infallibility did inflame them, judging by the heat it engendered.
   There were no new questions propounded by the students, which was not strange, as the doctrine of the infallibility of the pope had been attacked and answered from every possible angle. Here are a few of the questions put up to me, as well as my explanation of that mind-satisfying Catholic doctrine.
   "Do you mean to say that a man can be immune from error?" Much to their surprise was my answer. I do not know of any man in the world who is immune from error; though I believe that God could keep a man from falling into error. After letting that set in, I proceeded to say what I want you to know, that infallibility is attributed by the Catholic Church to an official, and not to a private individual. It is Pope Pius XII who is infallible, and not Mister, Father, nor even Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli.
   Then came the 999 thousandth time asked question, "Then you really believe that the pope can never make a mistake?" The answer was, No recognized Catholic speaker or writer ever made so ridiculous a claim. A Baltimore lady once asked Cardinal Gibbons with a look of surprise, "But Cardinal, you surely do not believe that the pope cannot err?" To this the Cardinal replied, with a twinkle in his eye, "The last time I was in Rome, the Pope said to me, 'And how are you, Cardinal Jibbons?'"
   Then came the ever-to-be expected query, "Catholics believe that the pope cannot sin, do they not?" No, Catholics do not so believe, was my immediate response. Proceeding to say that it is rather strange for university students to ask such a question, as a man immune from sin is impeccable, and not infallible, as a glance at the Standard Universal Dictionary proves, pointing to the copy on a nearby shelf. All are sinners to some degree, that is why all men who are faithful to the teachings of the Church go to confession. This includes the man who occupies Chair of Peter; but he goes to confession as a man and not as Pope. Please, I pleaded, after answering a dozen or more questions, do make distinction between the office and the man if you want to understand infallibility as the Church teaches it.
   I endeavored to impress the round table gathering with an understanding that the Catholic Church is an organic, doctrinally God-protected spiritual society; that Christ, its Founder, said "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (St. Matt. 16:18). This means that the evil forces, such as false doctrines, would never be able to put an end to her being the "pillar and mainstay of the truth," as St. Paul designated the Church (1 Tim. 3:16). There is none of the Talmudic doctrinal misunderstanding in the Catholic Church such as obtains in Jewry, where there is not even an agreement as to what constitutes a Jew. The theological terms used in the Catholic Church are clearly and intelligently defined, and agreed with by every bishop, priest, sister, brother and learned layman throughout the world. Hence if you look at any authoritative Catholic book, encyclopedia, dictionary, or catechism, you will find that infallibility is declared to be an official pronouncement issued by the occupant of the Chair of Peter, as pope, or the bishops in union with the pope; that is addressed to the Church throughout the whole wide world; for the purpose of defining a question of faith or morals. I repeat, faith and morals, as questions of mathematics, geology, astronomy, ethnology, physics, history, politics, and the like, are not within the province of papal infallibility.
   After that, the students said, "All right, we understand now that the pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals. Then the pope is inspired, God reveals to him what he shall say about faith and morals. Is that not so?"  No, emphatically no, is the answer of every writer and speaker of authoritative standing in the Catholic Church throughout the world. Inspiration is a positive power; it is God moving persons inspired to do something, such as write the books and epistles in the Old and the New Testaments. On the other hand, infallibility is assistance of a negative nature. It is the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Triune God, preventing His Church from falling into teaching error. No one who believes in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, a God who is essentially infallible, can reasonably deny the possibility of God using His protective power to keep His ambassador plenipotentiary from teaching an erroneous concept of His doctrine.
   Jews, who believe in the Torah, ought not to find infallibility an objectionable principle, considering that it is merely God safeguarding the integrity of his own teachings. God gave Moses, Aaron, and the succeeding high priests of Israel supreme authority to interpret His Law, delegating to them the right to see that "every transgression and disobedience received a just punishment," to quote St. Paul (Heb. 2:1-3), which in some instances meant death, viz.-

"The man that will be proud, and refuse to obey the commandment of the priest, who ministereth at that time to the Lord thy God, and the decree of the judge, that man shall die, and thou shalt take away the evil from Israel" (Deut. 17:12).

   The Mosaic Church of our fathers of old in Israel exists no more, as with the end of its priesthood the power to interpret the old Law, and to enforce its penal decree, became a thing of the historic past. But with the end of the Church of old God did not leave man without a doctrinal guide of His making. Jeremiah, the great Jewish prophet, foretold that a new, an "everlasting covenant" would be made, which would bring unity of faith (such as exists in the Catholic Church alone), as there was to be "one heart and one way . . . forever" (32:39-40). Such oneness in a universal teaching body is not possible during all time, under changing world conditions, without divine protection from error.
   The Church of the New Covenant is the Catholic Church. That Church is the "Body of Christ" (1 Cor. 5:27). It was to be, and is, one, - "one body and one spirit . . . one faith" (Eph.4:4-5). Christ commissioned that Church to "teach all nations to observe all that I (Christ) commanded." Christ promised to remain with that Church "until the consummation of the world" (St. Matt. 28:16-20). Christ said regarding His teachings, that "he who believes and is baptized shall be saved" (St. Mark 16:16); that he who refuses to "hear the Church" shall be condemned (St. Matt. 18:17). Again, that "it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gemorrah in the day of judgment than for the town" that will not "listen to the word" of Christ's teaching body (St. Matt. 10:15). Ask yourself these questions said I, "If I am to listen, and to obey the teachings of Christ; if I am to be punished for refusal to listen and obey them, whose words shall I listen to?" "Should I listen to Protestant churches, all of them professedly fallible?" "Shall I take the Bible as my infallible guide?" "How am I to know the Bible is infallible without some infallible guide proves it to be infallible?" "How am I to understand it with absolute certainty without an infallible interpreter?" Your conclusion must logically be, that if God has not instituted a teaching Church that is safe-guarded from error in matters of faith and morals, then is my opinion of what God wants me to do as good for me as any one else's opinion; then has God abandoned me to my whims, notions, and prideful concepts of His will. This borders on the blasphemous, as it is a denial of the all-mercifulness of God. It is not man, but God in His Church that makes the pronouncements of that Church to be absolutely true in matters of faith and morals. The safeguard from error in the Church is the Holy Spirit Christ promised, the Third Person of the Triune God.

"I will ask the Father and He will give you (the Apostolic Teaching Body) another paraclete to dwell with you forever, the Spirit of truth . . . He will dwell with you, and be in you" (St. John 14:15-17).

   From all this it follows that error in matters of faith and morals on the part of the Church, which is the "Body of Christ," would be error on the part of Christ Himself, and of the Holy Spirit indwelling, which is an impossibility, as God cannot possibly err.
   A spiritual society, being a human society in the sense of being composed of men with ministerial powers of a supernatural nature, would inevitably fall into error in the course of many centuries, irrespective of the intelligence of the men who compose it, unless it has God protecting it from error by being endowed with infallibility, the only guarantee of perfect truth in matters of faith and morals. If God did not leave man with an infallible Church to teach what He commanded to be taught, then is man not culpable if he concludes, as some ministers in other than the Catholic Church do, that there are only two and not seven sacraments, or no sacraments at all; that Christ is a perfect man, but not God; that divorce and remarriage, birth control, cremation, etc. are permissible.
   If there is an infallible Church in the world it must be the Catholic Church, as she is the only Church that claims to be infallible; then is she, as we Catholics believe her to be, the only Church that guarantees absolute certainty in matters religious? There is no doctrinal wavering in the Catholic Church; that is why Catholics have a unity of confidence in the authenticity of the teachings of their Church that can be found nowhere else in the world that calls itself Christian.
   Looking back over my night's work, to try and find out if the task was really worth while, I concluded that the prayerful spirit in which I tried to discuss the question of infallibility, rather than the data and arguments presented, may possibly have caused some of the seed I tried to plant into the minds and hearts of these students to take root.
   While they were intense at times, as was I myself, they were with minor exceptions very courteous. They seemed to be more impressed with my seriousness, and ever-readiness to meet their objections, than with the soundness of the matter presented. They were like you are, my dear Mr. Isaacs, anxious to discuss religion, but so filled with an inherited resistance to things Catholic (though not to Catholics personally) that their light was darkness.
   With all that, I continued to pray for them to share in the knowledge of Jesus as their Messiah, that they may share in the joy here and in eternity, given to those who know, love and serve Him with the certitude that the principle of infallibility guarantees.


Sincerely in the Messiah
D.... G........

 

Previous   |   Table of Contents    |   Next