%
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,
.