% 4 CHRISTIAN HKRALD. ____ Vvxxxvtkjx XXXIV XX IxxvxxxJtZt EDITOR : ' J. F. FLOYD. 55! 4 ----- « I Infallibility Again. Hithei^o we have allowed the Catholic Sentinel to have pretty much his own way in discussing the infallibility of the Pope and his Church. This we did in order to draw him out by degrees, allow him to fully define himself and thus take a firm stand in the advocacy apd defence of the doctrines and dogmas of the Catholic Church. We have now about located him so far as our present purpose is con cerned ; but as we are satisfied that he intends no such thing as fair ,and honorable. ■ controversy with us or any one else, nor even a respec table defense of the inconsistencies and absurdities of Romanism, we now notify him that this skip, hop ami jump business on his part must be stopped. The days of this kind of controversy are numbered, and the time of its doom draweth - ’nigh. Ifwe consent for him to have this controversy all to himself we suppose he will be able to make out a very plausable case of in fallibility for the Pope; but he will please rememl>er that this is a game that requires two to play, and we propose from this on to play our part. There is but one point be fore us and either this must be dis cussed or nothing. The Sentinel affirms that the Pope of Rome and the Catholic Church are infallible. We positively deny it. Here is a square issue; now let him prove what he affirms and leave his side shows to care for themselves. This is business; nothing else is worth our notice. In order to make out a case he draws a distinction be tween infallibility and impeccabili ty. The Pope ami the Church are infallible but not impeccable. This is a surrender of the whole ques tion of infallibility ; for if the Pope and the Church are peccable they are also fallible, inasmuch as infal libility includes impeccability. If this is not true, then when we say God is infallible it follows that he may be peccable. But everyone knows that the infallibility of God absolutely precludes all possibility of sin. Iuyigine an infallible sin ning Pope or Church ' Now if he simply means that the official and doctrinal utterances of the Pope are infallible because the words of the whether you intend it or not. infallible .jStf through him at such timqs, then let Hence, we repeat, Il is" Liasphemy him say so plainly. The Sentinel to attribute infallibility to a mere say s: man. We had asked : “ Will the ‘ Her Now we propose to meet the ald ’ please tell us whether Mat Sentinel on his own definition of thew, etc7““were infallible when He is astonished they wrote their gospels ?” The infallibility. editor of the “ Herald ” turns this when we ask if the Pope can per question thus: " But the Sentinel form miracles, etc. Yet, if we un wishes to know if we believe that derstand him he claims that the Matthew, Mark, Luke and John Pope is infallible in the same sense \yere infallible men ? We do not.” Where is your candor, brother ? as the writers ’of the New Testa Do you think us to be, boobies to ment, that is, not by any natural such an extent as not to see how endowments, but the Holy Spirit unceremoniously you twist our watches over the Pope as over the question from its natural meaning gospel writers and prevents him to a meaning we never intended ? from falling into doctrinal errors, Where is the “ twisting,” “ bro etc. Now he knows that these ther ?” When you asked us if writers were inspired by the Spirit Matthew, etc., were infallible we of God, and that in consequence of supposed you regarded these writers as men, hence it was perfectly na this some of them did perform mir acles, etc. If the Pope is inspired, tural for us to write men instead of smnetliing else. Wr natrrraRy sup» • why can he not do these things ? posed in all our simplicity that if If he is n<A inspired as were the Matthew was infallible, that he was apostle^ how are we to know that an infallible man, unless it should the Spirit guides him at all ? The Sentinel tries to show that turn out that he is not a man at all' Hence we denied that any of Paul was infallible by quoting him the writers of the Testament were as follows: “For, we can do noth infallible. If he had asked us if ing against the truth, but for the the Spirit that guided and con- truth,” and asks, “ Is not this infal We. reply that if this trolled their speaking andwriting libility was infallible, he would have re means that Paul is free from all sin ceived quite a different answer. “ and cannot commit it, then it is impeccability,” according to the The Sentinel further says: We hold that they were inspired, Sentinel himself. But if it has that the Divine Spirit suggested to reference to the doctrine he preach them what to write and how to ed, then it was the Spirit by which write it. and tliat the Holy Ghost he spake that was infallible and not watched over the words they used Paul. Still, the true interpretation in writing, so as to preserve them from lapsing into error. This pre of the text is left untouched. Let servation from error, coming from him show that the Spirit guides the the Holy Ghost, not from the na Pope as he did Paul. Remember tural endowments of the evangel the question is not whether Paul, ists, is a necessary consequence of Matthew or John were infallible, their inspiration, and that is the infallibility we claim for Matthew, but is the Pope, of Rome in Mark, Luke and John, “ when they fallible ? Let us have no more dodging the question, wrote their gospels.” Produce Very well. Then Matthew, the proof, not from tradition, Mark, Luke and John wen* not in but from the. word of God, fallible at all; it was the “Holy and we will accept it. If a Ghost ” that possessed the infalli “ fallible church is an absurd thing, bility. Yet he asks in his previous tell us how we can have an in article, “ Can not God communicate fallible one ? Because the truth is His attributes to his creatures ?” unchangable and immutable, does We replied that if He did to the it therefore follow that the church same extent that He possesses them, holding it is infallible ? The truth His creatures would be equal to must be understood and obeyed ? Himself. If He did not, then He Who is to do this interpreting ? If would fail to impart infallibility, all the members of the Church are for we deny infallibility to any one not infallible, how can the infalli except God, Christ and the Holy bility of the Pope help the matter ? Spirit. The Sentinel tries to ridi Has not the Church one infallible cule this dilemma by declaring that Head, Jesus Christ? Why have they are not guilty of equaling the another head ? Gan we not under Pope to God. Then do hot attrib stand Him as well as the Pope ? ute to the Pope an attribute which Or is the Pope wiser than He ? belongs to God only, for. in doing Let our friend of the Sentinel apply this you do make him equal to God , himself to the question in hand i " ■ - -■ ; -■ ■■ .. n I .....................■7——----■ ,, - and he will find«but little time to write has a good deal to learn yet, and the sooner he opens his eyes to a realization of the fact, the better it will be for him. -------------------- „................... I Christian Influence. If all Christian people could only realize the extent of their influence it would be a blessing to themselves and to the world -Ut •■’large. The great difficulty is to see ourselves as others see us. Every man, good or bad, not only has an influence, but his influence presents, two sides to the world. There is not a day nor an hour of his life that this * influence is not felt either for good or evil on those by whom he is sur rounded. Each man’s influence, like the rain drop that fills its place in the Pacific ocean and assists in swelling it to its mighty proportions, is a necessary element in the great moral and spiritual universe of God. The influence of men, like the presence of God, is seen and felt everywhere on one another. It is through this influ ence that the* Christian is enabled to do good to. hi msel fhis neighbor and his God. How careful then should he be in turning it in the right direction. Let us see to it that we so live as to shun the very appearance of evil. IB"*™""—'. 1 1 . 1 J.'l. J 8 J Selections and Comments. S top at J esus .—The Atlantic Missionary gives the following ex tract from Spurgeon’s Christmas sermon on “ The Star Once more, the star which Go<l used in this case was a star that stopped at Jesus-, it went before the wise men till it brought them to Jesus, and then it stood still over the place where the young child was. I admire the manner of this star. There are remarkable stars in the theological sky at the present time ; they have led men to Jesus, so they say, and now they lead them into regions l>eyond, of yet unde veloped thought. The Gospel of the Puritans is “ old-fashioned these men have discovered that it is unsuitable for the enlarged intel lects of the times; and so these stars ^ould guide us further still. I’o this order of wandering stars I do not belong myself, and 1 trust I nevpr shall. Progress beyond the gospel 1 have no desire for. “ God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.” , According to Baptist theology if .these stars have led men to Jesus there is not much danger of . losing them in regions bevond, for once in grace always in grace you know, .