INFALLIBILITY
796
INFALLIBILITY
tions being accepted under pain of anathema, while St.
Athanasius, for example, says that "the word of the
Lord pronounced by the oecumenical synod of Nica;a
stands for ever" (Ep. ad Afros, n. 2, in P. G., XXVI,
1031), and St. Leo the Great proves the unchangeable
character of definitive conciliar teaching on the ground
that God has irrevocably confirmed its truth — "uni-
versae fraternitatis irrctraetaViili firmavit assensu "
(En. cxx, 1, in P. L., LIV, 1047).
(3) It remains to be observed, in opposition to the theory of conciliar infallibility usually defended Ijy High Church Anglicans, that once the requisite papal confirmation has been given the doctrinal de- cisions of an cecumenical council become infallible and irref ormable ; there is no need to wait perhaps hun- dreds of years for the unanimous acceptance and ap- probation of the whole Christian world. Such a theory really amounts to a denial of conciliar infallibility, and sets up in the final court of appeal an altogether vague and ineffective tribunal. If the theory be true, were not the Arians perfectly justified in their prolonged struggle to reverse Nicaea, and has not the persistent refusal of the Nestorians down to our own day to ac- cept Ephesus and of the Monophysites to accept Chalcedon been sufficient to defeat the ratification of those councils? No workable rule can be given for deciding when such subsequent ratification as this theory requires becomes effective; and even if this could be done in the case of some of the earlier councils whose definitions are received by the Anglicans, it would still be true that since the Photian schism it has been practically impossible to secvire any such consen- sus as is required — in other words that the working of infallible authority, the purpose of which is to teach every generation, has been suspended since the ninth century, and that Christ's promises to His Church have been falsified. It is consoling, no doubt, to cling to the abstract doctrine of an infallible authority, but if one adopts a theory which represents that authority as unable to fulfil its appointed task during the greater part of the Church's life, it is not easy to see how this consolatory lielief is anything more than a delusion.
B. The Pope. — (1) The Vatican Council has defined as "a divinely revealed dogma" that "the Roman Pontiff, when "he .speaks ex cathedra — that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apos- tolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church — is, by reason of the Divine as- sistance promised to him in Islessed Peter, possessed of that infallibihty with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such defi- nitions of the Roman PontiiT are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church's consent" (Denzinger, no. 1S30 — old no. 16S0). Forthe correct understanding of this definition it is to be noted, in the first place, that what is claimed for the pope is infallibility merely, not impeccability or inspi- ration (see above under I). In the next place the m- fallibility claimed for the pope is the same in its nature, scope, and extent as that which the Church as a whole possesses; nor does his ex cathedra teaching, in order to be infallible, require to be ratified by the Church's consent. The pope teaching ex cathedra is an inde- pendent organ of infallibility. In the third place, mfallibility is not attributed to every doctrinal act of the pope, but only to his ex cathedra teaching; and the conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are mentioned in the Vatican decree: (a) The pontiff must teach in his pviblic and official capacity as pastor and doctorof all Christians, not merely in his private capac- ity as a theologian, preacher or allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. It must be clear that he speaks as spiritual head of the Church universal, (b) Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some
doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible (see be-
low, IV). (c) Further it must be sufficiently evident
that he intends to teach with all the fullness and final-
ity of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words
that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in
an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it
in the technical sense (see Definition). These are
well-recognized formula? by means of which the defin-
ing intention may be manifested, (d) Finally for an
ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope in-
tends to bind the whole Church, to deman<i internal
assent from all the faithful to his teaching under pain
of incurring spiritual shipwreck {nmifragium fidei),
according to the expression used by Pius IX in defining
the Immaculate Conception of the Bles.scd Virgin.
Theoretically, this intention might be made suffi-
ciently clear in a papal decision which is addressed
only to a particular Church; but in present day condi-
tions, when it is so ca.sy to communicate with the most
distant parts of the earth and to secure a literally
universal promulgation of papal acts, the presumption
is that unless the pope formally adtlresses the whole
Church in the recognized official way, he does not in-
tend his doctrinal teaching to be held by all the faith-
ful as ex cathedra and iiifallilile.
It should lie ob.served in conclusion that papal infallibility is a personal and incommunical)le charis- ma, which is not shared by any pontifical tribunal. It was promised directly to Peter, and to each of Peter's successors in the primacy, but not as a prerogative the exercise of which could be delegated to others. Hence doctrinal decisions or instructions issued by the Roman congregations, even when approved by the pope in the ordinary way, have no claim to be considered infallible. To be infallilile they must be issued by the pope himself in his own name according to the conditions already mentioned as rec)uisite for ex cathedra teaching.
(2) Proof of Papal Infallibility.— (a) From Holy Scripture. — From Holy Scripture, as already stated, the special proof of the pope's infalhbility is, if any- thing, stronger and clearer than the general proof of the infallil)ility of the Church as a whole, just as the proof of his primacy is stronger and clearer than any proof that can be advanced independently for the ApostoHc authority of the episcopate.
(i) "... thou art Peter (Kepha) ", said Christ, "and upon this rock (kepha) I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it " (Matt., xvi, 18). Various attempts have been made by opponents of the papal claims to get rid of the only obvious and natural meaning of these words, according to which Peter is to be the rock-foundation of the Church, and the source of its indefectibihty against the gates of hell. It has been suggested, for example, that " this rock" is Christ Himself, or that it is Peter's faith (typifying the faith of future believers), not his person and office, on which the Church is to be built. But the.se and similar interpretations simply destroy the logical coherency of Christ's statement and are excluded by the Greek and Latin texts, in which a kind of play upon the words Xl^rpos (Petrus) and Trirpa (petra) is clearly intended, and still more forcibly by tile original Aramaic which Christ spoke, and in whicn the same word Kepha must have been usetl in lioth clauses. And granting, as the best modern non- Catholic commentators grant, that this text of St. Matthew contains the promise that St. Peter was to be the rock-foundation of the Church, it is impossible to deny that Peter's successors in the primacy are heirs to tills promi.se — unless, indeed, one is willing to admit the iirinoiple, which would be altogether .subversive of the hierarchial system, that the authority bestowed by Christ on the .Vpostles was not intended to be transmitted to their successors, and to abide in the Church permanently. Peter's headship was as much emphasized by Christ Himself, and was as clearly
