5/>© Infallibility of
“She Pope.

San Francisco

:

Catholic Truth Society



CATHOLIC TRUTH SOCIETY.

The Catholic Truth Society is an association estab-

lished for the purpose of spreading the truth about

the Catholic Church by means of literature and lec-

tures. Catholic literature in popular form is the most

powerful means of spreading Catholic truth. The

general public will not read long and exhaustive treat-

ises on religious questions, but brief, well-written

pamphlets will rarely fail to interest and instruct.

The Truth Society aims at popularizing Catholic litera-

ture. It publishes numerous pamphlets on every phase

of Catholic thought and it furnishes them at nominal

cost. All interested in the dissemination of Catholic

truth are invited to lend their aid in the circulation of

these publications. It is our duty, as Catholics, to

assist in spreading and defending Catholic truth.

Copies of the publications of the Society are mailed

regularly to members. Any person may become a

member by paying an annual fee of one dollar.



AEP01/O
Ik'k*

X5he Infallibility

of

&/>e Pope.

A Lecture.

By Rev. Peter C. Yorke.

x?ie subject of my lecture is “The Infallibility of the
Pope.” Like all the dogmas of the Catholic Church,

this one has been misrepresented. Indeed, there are

few non- Catholics who have correct ideas of what it

means. My object to-night will be to explain the doc-
trine as fully as I can, to set before you the chief rea-

sons which support it, and to consider its bearings on

that allegiance which we owe the Republic, and which

we give in as full measure and as freely and unre-

servedly as any other denomination in the land.

A Witness to Truth.

Many of you ladies and gentlemen remember the
outcry which was made, over a quarter of a century

ago, when it was proposed in the Vatican Council to
define the doctrine of Papal infallibility. The wise

men of the period prophesied all kinds of trouble; but
the Church was not afraid. Those who are familiar
with her history know of her splendid courage. She
believes that she possesses the truth, and she is not
29

1



V THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE PCPE .

afraid to say what the truth is. From the earliest
times, when questions arose about the extent of dog-

mas, and about their relations one to another, or to

human science; when men and nations were divided in
opinion, then the Church spoke. It did not matter

that heretics shook the dust from their feet and went

out from her. It did not matter that whole nations

threw off her yoke and settled into schism. It did not

matter that emperors and kings smote the chief pas-

tor and harassed the flock. Like a mother her soul

yearned after her rebellious children, and her heart

was sore for the faithful slain before her eyes. Still

she could not keep silent. She has been set for a sign

and a testimony unto the truth, and speak she must.

Greater than princes, kings, nations— aye, greater

than the blood of her bravest and her best, is that of

which she is the witness—the truth of the living God.
The Results of Protest.

And so in our generation when the need arose she
proclaimed the truth as it is in Christ Jesus. The

need came from the logical development of thought

since the Reformation. You know that in the six-
teenth century the reformers went out of the Catholic

Church to found churches of their own. They ap-

pealed to the Bible as the sole and supreme judge in

matters of religion, and rejected the authority of the

Pope. You all know too, what the result was. They
divided into numerous sects, each heartily hating the

other and united only in their common hostility to

Rome. As long as the chief Protestant churches were

State churches and were protected by law, and as

long as conformity with their teachings were enforced

by fines, imprisonment, stripes and death, a certain

permanency was assured them. But during this nine-

teenth century the old penal laws have been repealed.

The bond between Church and State has grown much

weaker, and, as a consequence, Protestantism has

had full scope to go to its logical extreme. At first

it protested against the Church, then it protested



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 8

against the Bible, soon it protested against Christ,

and finally it protested against God. I do not say

these things to offend the feelings of Protestants or

to imply that all Protestants reject the Bible, or

Christ or God. I merely wish to draw your attention

to the fact that the original protest against the

Church has produced all these other protests

;

that the result of the Protestant Reformation

was a divided Christendom. Each of the reform-

ers appealed to the Bible as the sole rule of faith

and proclaimed the principle of private judgment,

and of course each of them had his own opinion

about religion, and the result was that sect after sect

sprang up all over Europe, each claiming to be the

true sect and each anathematizing all the others. It

is a very peculiar thing that, though all the Protes-

tant churches believe in the right of private judg-

ment, believe that a man should have an open Bible
and that he should search it diligently, and that it is

lawful for him to draw his own conclusions therefrom

—

it is a very peculiar thing that very few of the

churches carry out their belief in practice. Thus you

know that when a very estimable lady of this city

was in Calvary Presbyterian church, and from, her

study of the Bible and the assistance of prayer came

to the conclusion that infant damnation was a doc-

trine to which she could not subscribe, they tried her

for heresy and she had to leave that church. You
know that in all of the other churches as soon as any
man puts his principles into action and takes his
Bible, studies it carefully and arrives at a conclusion

different from that which is laid down in the creeds of
the church, they immediately try him for heresy and

if he does not want to go out, he is made to go out.

Indifference.

Now, the result of all this has been what is com-

monly called indifference. Men—sensible men—who
have made a success in business and who think for
themselves, look upon all these churches, each one



4 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

contradicting the other, each one intolerant of the

other, and come to the conclusion that either they

are all false or that one religion is as good as an-

other. No other country in the world has shown this
tendency to a greater extent than our own, for

though we have here 65,000,000 of people who should

all be either Catholics or Protestants, 45,000,000 of

them do not pretend to belong to any church. But,

by the last census, there are only 20,000,000 church

members in these United States, and of these

20,000,000 half are Catholics. So when it comes down

to an examination of what has been the result of pri-

vate judgment and an open Bible, we find that out of

a population, say of 50,000,000, who should be Pro-

testant by descent or by training, only 10,000,000 of

them believe in the dogmas or in the churches of their

fathers.

Loss of Idea of Revelation.

I need not dwell upon the practical result of this.

It is the perfectly natural man who thinks that religion
is all very good in its way, but that after all it is

merely a human opinion. It is something that has
grdwn up in the course of time, without any sanction

behind it except perhaps the personality of the per-

son who preaches it and his eloquence which is suc-

cessful in drawing crowds. As a matter of fact, all
over the United States to day—and what is true of
the United States is true in a great measure of Eu-

rope—the old idea of revelation, the old idea of religion
is practically dead. The old idea of religion as a mes-

sage from God to man has faded out of men’s hearts.
Men seem to have forgotten all about it in the strife
for success, or in the babble of confusing voices; that

old word which worked wonders in the days of yore,

which moved strong men’s hearts to endure all things

for the sake of the faith, that word which swayed

princes and kings is no longer heard, “ Thus saith the

Lord.”



5THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

St. Peter’s Office.

it was to meet this widespread idea that religion

was nothing but a matter of human speculation, and

that there was no speaking of God to man, that the

Vatican Council was called some twenty- five years

ago. As I told you, the Church is the witness to the

truth. Peter’s rock stands out as it were a watch-

tower, and from it the sentinel looks out over all the

world. His eyes are keen and he is wise with the

wisdom of nineteen hundred years. He looks out upon
the race of men, like a vast ocean all around him,

heaving and tossing under the contrary winds. He
knows which way the current sets. He knows what
is needful for the times, and so it was that when in our

generation he saw the tide of indifferentism threaten-

ing to sweep thousands—aye, millions—away from the
faith, he lifted up his voice and warned the world

against this tendency. It was nothing to him that

the world loved its own. It was nothing to him that

the world had made an idol of this indifferentism. It

was nothing to him that a thousand contradictory

voices rose up against him. He was set upon the
watch tower to do God’s work, and he would do it al-

though he should die as forty of his predecessors died

before him.

The Vatican Council.

So, though the clouds hung dark over all Europe,

though Prussia had gathered her armies upon the

frontiers of France; though the Spanish nation was in

a chronic revolution; though Italy had rebelled against

him who had saved Italy in the days of old; though

there seemed to be no help from man, he whose

strength is in the hands of the Almighty was not tim-

orous of heart. From the East and from the West,
from Europe, Asia, Africa, America and the isles of

the sea he called the successors of the Apostles. Seven

or eight hundred Bishops gathered around him. They

spoke with the wisdom of the Holy Ghost, and they

declared that it had seemed good to them and to that



6 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

same Holy Ghost to proclaim to the world that there

was a revelation; that there was a speaking from God

to man; that that revelation was true, and that that

revelation was infallible.

What is Revelation.

Let me explain, for a moment, what is meant by
revelation. You know that from the earliest times
men’s minds have been occupied with the question,
“ What is truth ? ” You remember in the Passion of
our Lord, where Pilate spoke to Him and said, “What
is truth ? ” and he did not wait for an answer. It has

been the same with all men from the beginning. They
have asked, “What is truth ? ” and in their hurry to
give a reply, they have missed the answer. We are,
in this world, something like men sitting in a hall or a
room. You hear from the outside sounds. Sometimes,
as now, it is the tinkling of a bell. You hear various
noises coming to your ears. You ask yourselves what
causes these noises ? Some of you may say, “ It is a
street car.” Some of you may think it is a peddler;
some of you may give some other reason, each one
fashioning to himself, from what his senses tell him,

what he considers the best explanation of these noises

that come to his ears.

While you may be debating here with one another
as to what these noises really mean, and what causes

them, someone who has been outside, and who has seen

what has caused these noises, may come from the out-
side into this hall and inform you of it.

In the first case, that is to say, when you used your

own minds and your own conjectures to describe and
to explain these noises, you are said to reason.

In the second case, when the man comes in and gives
you on his authority the explanation of these noises,

you are said to believe.

One is reason; the other is faith.

Messengers of Revelation.

If, while you are in this hall, and cannot get out,



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 7

these noises continue; and one side of the audience be-

lieves there is one cause for them, and the other side

believes there is another, two men come before you

and both of them say that they have been outside and

that they know the real cause of the noise, and one

says it is one thing and the other says it is another,

your explanation immediately will be that either or

both are telling what is not true, or that one of them

is mistaken. The two of them cannot be true at the

same time. If one says the ringing of the bell is caused

by a street car, and the other says it is caused by a

peddler, it is quite possible that both of them may be

false. But it cannot be possible that the two of them

can be true. So, therefore, when anyone comes to

you and asks for your belief, and asks for your faith,

and demands that you believe him concerning what he

has seen in some other place, the first thing you must

require of him is that his tale be consistent. He can-
not tell one story to one side of the house and another

story to another side of the house. His message must

be one, and his message must be of such a nature that

it is consistent in itself. Moreover, you can generally

tell from your reason, not exactly what may be the
cause of the noise, but you may tell something of the
nature of the noise. For instance, we are listening to

something now like the tinkling of a bell. If a man
said to you from this platform that the noise was

caused by somebody blowing a horn you would not be-

lieve him. You would say, “ The nature of the noise
is not such as to be caused by a horn. Whatever it is

caused by, the proximate cause of it is a bell.’'

So, when a man comes and tells you about religion,
or about anything else, and asks you for your belief,

another condition you must put upon him is that his

story be reasonable. It may not be necessary for
your reason to pick out every step in the process. It

is not necessary for you to be able to prove everything

by your senses; but you must insist that whatever is

told you must not be contrary to reason.



6 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

Human Faith.

In this world we are shut in as an audience in this

hall. We are each of us imprisoned within our five
senses. We only come in contact with exterior things
through touch, sight, hearing, taste and smell. We
have no other means of knowing, except what we learn

from word of mouth on the authority of others. By
the senses we know very many things. By belief we
know still more things.

Some people imagine that it is irrational to believe.

They say that faith is against reason; that it does not

become the dignity of a rational man to give credence
to anyone else. Yet how could we exist unless we

gave credence to others? How many of you would be
present in this hall this evening if you did not believe

others ? How many of you would be able to go about
your daily work unless you put faith in others ? For

instance, there are thousands of things which we

have never seen, and yet we believe. Many of us
have not seen a land called Australia, yet we firmly

believe that it exists. Very few of us have ever seen

the Transvaal, yet we hear of it every day and we
have not the slightest doubt in our minds that there

is such a place, and a very difficult place too. So, as

a matter of fact, we have to take it for granted that

belief, that the giving credence to others, is not

against reason, but is part of that very reason itself.

God and Man.

When we come to religion we find, as I said, that
we are inclosed in this world as this audience is in

this hall. We have no direct communication with
God. No man has ever seen Him. Man cannot look
on Him and live, but though we are poor, miserable
creatures whose days are few and full of trouble, still

we have thoughts and desires after God. We are like
the tree in the old fable, whose roots were in the

earth reaching down even to hell, but whose head was

in the heavens. We have desires and aspirations in
us which go above this mortal, this earthly sphere.



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 9

We wish to know about God, We wish to learn of
Him, and we desire to hear His truth. #

So, from the beginning, just as you may have been
speculating here on the cause of noises and sounds

that occurred in the street, mankind has been specu-

lating about the things that are beyond the sky.

Many think sometimes that we are far from God.
But, ladies and gentlemen, the more we meditate,
the more we look on nature, the more we gaze on the
sky, which is the work of His hands, the nearer and

the closer we feel God to be to us. He is not, as it
were, a far-away God. We cannot look on the things
* hlch his hands have made, and not feel that He
is directing them and preserving them. Our very

reason teaches us of these things, and from the things

which He made, and which show forth His glory, we
try to fathom out what manner of God He is.
And I say, from the beginning, there have been

various opinions among men. Some have confounded

Him with His works. Some have made statues and
images of Him, and have fallen down and adored them.

Some have deified the sun and moon and the host of

heaven. Some of them have explained God almost

out of existence, yet, no matter how they dealt with

Him, all of them recognize that there was something

beyond this earth, something above us, something

outside of us, something that has made us, and some-

thing to which, in the long run, we must come and

give an account.

Is there a Revelation?

Now, the question arises, has that God ever spoken

to man ? Has He ever sent any one from the beyond
who knows what God is, and who knows how to ex-
plain Him, and how to tell of his truths

;
to make a

revelation, to draw aside the veil, to make, as it

were, the walls transparent, so that we should see
what causes all those sounds beyond ? Has any one
ever come to reveal God to us ?

Ladies and gentlemen, you know that Christianity



10 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

claims to be a revelation. Yon know that Christianity
claims to be the truth, not made up by human reason,
but the truth as it was sent from God to man

;
that

that truth was sent by a messenger, namely, Jesus

Christ; that He came and gave proof of the divinity
of His message, and that, therefore, we believe that
this message came really and truly from the beyond,

was really and truly a communication from God to
man, a revealing of Himself and the telling of the

truth which He wished us to believe. It is not neces-
sary for my argument to enter upon the proof of this.
I am speaking now to Christians, those who believe
that Christ was not a mere humanly inspired seer,

but that He was a prophet, that He was sent by God,
and that God gave Him credentials to prove that His
message was a true one. It would be another lecture

and another subject altogether to prove to those who

do not believe in the divine mission of Christ, that He
was divinely sent, and that His miracles put the seal

of God’s testimony on the truth of His Holy Word.

Christ’s Message.

But supposing that Christ’s message comes really

from God, let us consider for a few moments what

must be the meaning of that message. In the first

place, that message must be one. Just as the person

who comes in from the street and purports to tell you

what is happening on the outside must be consistent,

so you must demand tnat the revelation which comes

from the beyond which comes from God, must be one.

It must be the same yesterday, to-day, and forever.

It must be the same for all classes of men. It must

be the same for the white man and the black, tor the

yellow man and the red. It must be the same for
prince and for peasant, for rich and for poor. If it is

true, if it is God’s truth, it must be immutable and it

must be one.

The Certainty of Revelation.

This revelation must also be certain. If it is a



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 11

^message from God, we are bound to obey it. 1 don’t
suppose there is any sensible man who thinks of
standing on his rights as against God. God made him
and He gave him human reason, and as long as reve-
lation comes up to the requirements of that human
reason, and as long as God makes it manifest to any

man that He speaks, then that man must believe. He
is bound to believe, just as the child is bound to be-

lieve its parent when that parent tells it anything.
So man is bound to believe God, because God can
speak nothing but truth, and because God has power
to command.

The Infallibility of Revelation.

Now, if revelation comes to us with a claim on our

belief, that revelation must have never erred, because

if it could err, if the messenger whom God sent could
corrupt that revelation, could change its terms, and

could say what was not true, then we would be bound

by God’s authority to believe a lie. God cannot do

this. God is infinite truth. God cannot command us

to do what is wrong. Therefore, if God sends revela-

tion with the command that it is to be believed, that

revelation must always, at all times and under all

circumstances be absolutely and unqualifiedly true.

Hence if God has appointed any body of men, or has

appointed any man, to be the mouthpiece of that

revelation, to be His messenger, as it were, between

Himself and mankind, that messenger must be in-

fallible. If he makes a mistake, if he can corrupt the

message, then it is no longer God’s revelation. And
if it is not God’s revelation, then the authority of God

is invoked a second time to protect and diffuse a lie.

The Church.

Now, let us come and ask ourselves whether there

is such a revelation ? All Christians say there is. All

Christians say that this revelation was made by Christ,

and that it is held now in some way in Christendom
and that we have in various shapes and forms a mes-



18 TME INFALLIBILITY OF TME POPE.

sage from God. You will remark, in the first place,
that Christendom is divided into two great parts.

You have first the Catholic Church, and then you have
the various Protestant denominations. Now, notice.

Outside of the Catholic Church there is not a single

denomination that claims infallibility. Each one of
them claims to have a revelation, each one of them

claims to have the message from God to man, each one

claims to be the sole depository of that revelation, yet

not a single one of them claims that that revelation is

infallible. If they are not infallible, if they make a
mistake, what is the use of a revelation; if a man can
corrupt God’s word and still claim belief for it, what

is the use of God speaking at all ? Are we to think
that He spoke nineteen hundred years ago and then
that His voice has been dead ever since ? Are we to

think that He spoke in order that His gracious pur-
pose might be defeated ? Are we to think that He
sent His Son upon earth in order that, when that Son

should go back to sit at His right hand in glory, the

work which He came to build up should be torn down
and scattered abroad ? Surely human reason will not

consent to such a supposition. We believe that it is
reasonable to suppose that God has spoken, and we

believe it reasonable, on the other hand, to suppose

that God has never spoken at all. But it is not rea-

sonable to suppose that God, having spoken; was not

able to preserve His own word intact.

If there is a revelation, that revelation must be in

the hands of some infallible authority. Now, let us

see if Christ, during His mortal life, appointed any

one to guard His revelation and to act as its mouth-

piece.

You will remember, both in reading the Scripture
and in hearing it read, that Christ came to found a

Church. He speaks of that Church as a kingdom.
He speaks of it as a sheepfold. He speaks of it as a
city. He speaks of it in various other ways, all of
which imply that it was to be some kind of a society.

You know that He was not to remain always upon



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 13

earth. His mission ended in thirty-three years. He
did not leave the small kingdom in which He was born
and in which His work was done* Therefore, if He
was to teach G-od’s message to men, and if He was to
bring God’s truth to all men (and if it be for one man
it must be for all men), He could only do it by means
of some society or some organization which would

carry on the work when He had returned to His
Father.

The Apostles.

We find that the three years of His ministry, the
three years of His public life, were occupied almost

entirely in founding this society. He gathered twelve
poor fishermen together. He brought them around
with Him, He trained them; and those who are famil-
iar with the Scriptures know how difficult it was to
train them. They were poor, they were ignorant,

they were filled up with all kinds of ideas about what

Christ was to do. And so, for the time, instead of lis-
tening to His instructions, instead of trying to reach

those who were outside, they were asking Him to call
down fire from heaven to burn them up, because

they would not listen to them, or they were quarrel-

ing among themselves for the good places.

We read of this in the Sacred Scripture, and we
read that our Lord, no less that four or five times*

was compelled to rebuke them; and He even took a
little child and put it in their midst, and said to them:
“ Unless you become as a child, a little child, you can-

not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” But the ex-

ample did not seem to have much effect upon them,

because the next day we find them going up and ask-

Him who will be the greatest in the kingdom of hea-
ven.

The Hierarchy.

Now, mark the answer. Christ does not say to
them there will be no greatest in the kingdom of hea-

ven. If He had wished to slop their quarreling he



14 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPM.

could have said at once,
u
In the kingdom of heaven

you are all equal.’ ’ But He did not say, “ In the king-
dom of heaven you are all equal;” but again He took
a little child, and said to them : “ He that would be-
come the greatest in the kingdom of heaven, let him

become as this little child.”

Then you remember the incident of the two sons of

Zebedee. They received no satisfaction from our Lord

in asking who would be the greatest in the kingdom of

heaven; so they got their mother to go and say to our

Lord, to ask Him plain and outright, that one should
sit on His right hand and the other on His left hand.

Our Lord in reply did not say, “No one shall sit at
My right hand,” or “No one shall sit at My left hand,”
but He said: “To sit at My right hand or my left
hand is not Mine to give, but it is his to whom the
Father hath given it.” Which shows that in this

kingdom which was to be founded Christ meant that

there were to be officers and dignities, and that some

of them should sit at His right hand, just as the Vice-

roys and Prime Ministers sat at the right hands of

the great Kings of the East, but that such honor was

not given by self-presumption, but was giv’en to him

for whom the Father hath reserved it in the eternal
decrees of His all-wise providence.

The Duties of the Chiefs.

The last time we find the Apostles quarreling about

place and power was at the last supper. Even in the

very supper room of our Lord, St. Luke tells us that

a contention arose among them which of them should

be the greater. An incident happened a little while
before, the true meaning of which they did not know,

but they were talking with one another about it.

There were two persons in the company to whom our
Lord seemed especially attached. One of them was

John, the beloved disciple, who lay upon His breast at

the last supper; and the other was St. Peter. And
the query arose among the Apostles as to which should

be the greater. And again Christ rebuked them. He



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 15

dld
“P*

tell them that none among them should be the

fif
ater- He said to them : “Let him who is great

an

?°“f
be as your servant.” He was the great-

wLVjj aii: e7ery°ne admits that. Our Lord,
Ano«tIp

Und
w

th
n
Apos

.

tleshiP> was greater than any
,

p
a t

^ calls their attention to His own exam-
ple. A few moments before, He had gone around the

had^nelt 2
& X®1 2irded around His waist He

AndXn
d

u !u
d washed the feet of the Apostles.

Wm lw’ ^
hen th

f
y be2ai1 to quarrel, He said: “Let

let him Vi? ?
reater among you act as the minister;

served’
1S cbief among y°u become as one who

ZJ
-

;

Ca
L
m
!
among you,” He said, “ not to bemmis 1;ered unt°, but to minister. I am the Christ. I” Chief

-

,

1 y°ur Master. Yet I have given

come he t
ewmp e of hum,1ity, SO that in the days to

he^rt of a

h

hf+l

S §/;?atest among you must have the

t

°hl d
’
and must have the humble will

meniaToffice.^
^ 8 brethren even in the most

dent

iS

and

r

^v
n

^
larh

,

0Wmencan perverfc this inci‘

meant that^he.
“ak<

; u
proof out of 14 that Christ

£hS ChfLl
be

-

n° officers or dignitaries

niJr
1S^burcb A, Tbe wbole significance of the incidentdepends upon the fact that there were to be officersand that there were to be dignitaries. It would re

areXuaf
-° 56 * minister where all

for a man wh. n l
requires a great deal of humility

h has been set on a pinnacle of authority
to come down and be as a little child.

y

St. Peter’s Exaltation.

*nc^ent is not closed yet. After telling

turns to

e

Sf

1S

P°p

S

t

ti0D tbey
x
,
reaUy should have, Christturns to St. Peter, and He says: “Simon Simon l

PnXw^ desired you, hath got you by asking fromGod, that he might sift you as wheat is sifted inXwinnowing.” He meant that the hour was at hand
Tndw?

6

Sr°

We
u
rS
f darkness should have their swayand when He should die for the salvation of the world



16 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

He meant that in that hour His little Church was not
to be spared, that Satan had asked it from God, and

that God, for His own inscrutable reasons, had given

them into his hands, in order that cowardice and ter-

ror might fill their hearts and they might betray their

Master and flee awav#
But Christ continued: “ But I have prayed”—He

did not say “for you” “for all the Apostles”—He
said, “but I have prayed for thee, Simon Peter. I

have prayed for thee, that thy faith may not fail, and
when thou art converted, do thou make strong thy
brethren”—the brethren who a few minutes before
had been quarreling about who was to be the greatest;

they had been asking one another who was to be the

chief of the kingdom of God. This was Christ’s an-

swer : They were the men who would follow the
Master even to death; they had promised to die for

Him, and in their presumption they were already

dividing the spoils of the kingdom. And Christ tells
them : You are all in the hands of Satan, and in a
few hours he will sift you, just as the wheat is sifted

in the winnowing. But there is one of you, one out

of the eleven, for whom I have prayed, and whose
faith shall never fail and who will have the making of

you boasters and braggarts strong again when the

stress and storm are past. That one, ladies and

gentlemen, that one who had to rally the routed army

of Christ, that one who was given authority to renew

the faith in the hearts of the disciples, that one who
was thus set before them all, was Simon Petei, the

Prince of the Apostles.

The Great Confession.

This is not the first time that Christ had spoken to

them in such a manner. While He was still in Galilee,
before He had come down to Jerusalem, He retired to
the foot of Mount Hermon, and there gathered His

Apostles around Him. You know that when Christ
established this little society, He did not reveal Him-
self fully at once. He did not tell immediately who



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPEt 17

He was or what His purpose was on earth. He let
it sink into their minds little by little, and He allowed
them to find out as much as they could for themselves.

They were poor men, ignorant men, uneducated men,

illiterate men, and He had to teach them very slowly.
So it came to pass that near the close of His earthly

mission He was at the foot of Mount Hermon. Rumors
had been going around the country about Him. At

that time, as you know, the Jews were subject to

Rome, and they were not willing subjects. They were

'always patriotic, always loved the glories of the house

Of David, and were always looking forward to the

iime when the Son of David should come and revive

those glories. As a result they were restless under

Roman domination, and they had prophets rising up

liere and there, and leading them on to fruitless rebel-

lions and attacks upon the Roman power.
jSo when Christ passed from Galilee, men asked,
‘tWho is He ? ” And some of them said that He was
J<ihn the Baptist, others said He was Elias, and
others still said He was Jeremias, the prophet. The
pdpular belief was that these prophets were to return

and precede the Messias, or the Christ, who was to
lem them on to victory.

So, when Christ gathered His disciples about Him,

and some men had said that it was Jeremias, and
sor^e that it was Elias, and others still that it was

Johk the Baptist, or others of the prophets, He asked
theiji, “Who do you say that I am?” And Simon
Petyr answered and said: “Thou art the Christ,
the Son of the living God.” It had dawned upon his

mindthat he was dealing not with a mere man. It

had dawned upon him that the day had come at last,

the hng expected day of the nations, when the

heavens were to open, and the Son of God was to
come ^own upon earth. He had pierced through the
outer \yesture; He had pierced through the veil of
flesh; He had pierced through the human guise that
hid thl Godhead, and he declared in his new-born

faith: \“Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living

God.”
\



18 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

The Great Promise.

Then our Lord said to him : “ Blessed art thou,

Simon, son of Jonas, because flesh and blood hath not

revealed it unto thee, but My Father, who is in
heaven. And I say unto thee that thou art the rock,
and upon this rock will I build My church, and the
gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And to
thee will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven,

and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth shall be

bound also in heaven.”

If we are to believe that our Lord was serious

that He came on earth with a serious purpose to ful-
fill, we must believe that these words mean some-
thing. If they mean nothing at all, if they are mere
compliments, as it were, passed between our Blessed

Lord and Saint Peter, then they were the most mis-

leading words that ever have been penned by man.

Let us see what they imply : They imply thit

Christ was about to build this church; that is to say,

that He was about to found a society. That society
was to carry on His work when He was to go. He
was going to build that society so strong, so Ann,

that the very gates of hell should not prevail agaust

it. And how did He intend to make it strong ? Eow
did He intend to make it firm ? How did He intend
to make it so solid that the gates of hell should not

prevail against it ? Only in one way, just as the

good architect does when he wishes to build his louse

strong and solid and firm—he goes right down t# the
living rock. And so Christ was to build His chirch
upon a rock, and that rock was Saint Peter.

The Center of Unity.

Let us remember that the society which Jhrist

established had for its chief object to teach rela-

tion. His chief object in coming to earth vas to

bring a message from God to us. His main pirpose,

therefore, in founding this society, was to lave an

organization which would carry out His message; to

have an organization which would be able to say,



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 19

“ This is what Christ taught.” Now, you understand,

that when a human society is founded, especially a
society which is to teach a certain set of dogmas,

there is always danger of schism and division. Men
begin to inquire, and to speculate, and to compare,

and the result is that some of them get one idea about

the truth and some of them get another idea about

the truth. And, as a matter of fact, all the old

philosophers who founded schools to carry on their

work saw—some of them with their own eyes—those
schools split up into various sections, and the sec-

tions splitting into still smaller sects. It is human

S

is a thing which is bound to come infallibly

constitution of man’s mind, that if any

made the repository of truth, the members

:iety are bound to split up and divide on the

f the truth.

unding His Church, Christ had to face this

He had to face the difficulty of leaving His
Le hands of a body of men and then to pro-

these men would not split up into several
id entirely lose His truth. It was against

as providing when He spoke of founding His
on the rock—a foundation itself that holds
i together, a foundation itself which makes

one. If a house is founded upon the solid

is no fear of its falling asunder, no matter

3 may blow nor what rains may beat. And
r to preserve His Church one, in order to

:rom all occasions for schism and heresy, in

ake it last to the end of time as the deposi-

ts truth, He founded it upon that rock,
;. Peter and his successors.

Proved by History.

i office of St. Peter and of his successors is

e the Church one, by preserving the truth,

1st gave to the Church, one. You will
ow this is worked out in history. Every
has separated from the rock of Peter has



20 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPS.

split into still smaller sects. When the reformers
began there were only two or three parties among
them. To-day, in the United States alone, there are

two hundred and forty-two different kinds of Christian

religions. There has been only one Church, one com-

munity, which has remained one, and which has held

the truth; that Church has remained one, and has

held the truth simply because it was founded upon

the rock, because it is in communion with the See

which Peter founded.

I will not dwell longer upon this, as the time is

getting late; I will not dwell longer on the historical

proofs that Peter, as the head of the Church and the

rock upon which the Church was built, had successors,

and that these successors were the reigning Pontiffs.

I come now to that feature of the Pope as the suc-
cessor of St. Peter, which is intimately connected

with this fact of teaching revelation.

The Pope’s Infallibility.

Let me run back for a moment. You remember I
said to you that revelation was God’s explanation to

man of the things that be; that the explanation as
coming from God must be one, must be true. Now,

if God appointed a mouthpiece of that revelatior, if

He appointed any one to guard it—and He has ap-
pointed it in His Church and in the head of the

Church—then that person must be infallible. If the
Pope as the guardian of revelation, and as the

authentic mouthpiece of revelation could, when pro-

claiming that revelation speak an untruth, thei the

gates of hell would have prevailed against the rock of

Peter.

I do not know any more signal victory which the

powers of evil could have achieved than if thousands,

millions of men believed, as they do believe, tint God

has appointed (as He has appointed) the Pontif to be
the guardian and depository of revelation, ;nd the

Pontiff in proclaiming that revelation could le?d these

millions of men astray, then Satan hath prevailed



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 21

against God, and Christ's good purpose has come to

naught.

But we cannot believe this, and, therefore, we hold

as a necessary consequence of the idea of revelation,

as a truth that common sense itself demands that if
there is a revelation, and if that revelation is in the

Catholic Church, if the Pope is the head of the

Church with authority to speak, then that Pope,

when he so speaks, must be infallible.

Infallability not Impeccability*

From this you will see at once that infallibility does
not mean that the Pope never sins. When some good
people hear about infallibility, their hair stands up on

end at once, and they bring up a list of this Pope and

the other Pope that was a bad man, they say; and

they say; “How could these people be infallible ? ”

There is only one answer to it. The Pope is a man
like unto other men. We have had some two hun-
dred and fifty Popes. There were twelve Apostles,

and one of them was a traitor. Can we expect that

there should be less among the Popes ? There were

seven deacons, and one of them was a very bad man.

Shall we be surprised if we find three or four among

the Popes ? They can find (we admit it with sorrow)

men among the Popes who were unworthy of their

sacred office. But through nineteen hundred years

they can count them all on the fingers of one hand.

The Bad Popes.

Our separated brethren are fond of, as it is com-

monly said, rubbing this into us. They think they

have a good point to make against the old Church
when they talk of this one and the other one who was

not a credit to his station. But let us remember this:

When the time comes that a Methodist Bishop, or a
Presbyterian preacher, or a Congregational pastor

shall have as much power as the Pope of Rome, when
they shall be kings over a certain territory, and when

they shall have the whole world believing that they



K THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

are the vicars of Jesus Christ; when things come to

this condition, and when bishops or pastors or Pres-

byterians come through as unscathed as the Popes

have, then they may have reason to talk. Those men
who speak of the Popes do not seem to realize in

those far off days, when a few Popes were bad, all

the terrible temptation that was thrown in their

way. And when to-day we find those men who are so
anxious to make out that the Popes were not angels,

when we find themselves not proving their angelic

nature; we can say to them, in homely phrase, “ It is

not good to holler until you are out of the woods.”

The Case of David.

But anyhow, the doctrine of infallibility has nothing

whatsoever to do with the person and character of

the Pontiff. But men may say,
i(

Canit be possible

that Almighty God will make a man, a bad man, the

channel of His infallibility ? ” God’s ways are very

mysterious. Who aie we that we shall say that He
should do this and He should not do that ? Anyhow,
people who believe in the inspiration of the Bible have

no right to taunt Catholics with this argument, be-

cause we must remember that the man who composed
most of the Psalms, the sweet singer of Israel, was

King David, whose words are looked upon as the

word of God, as His inspired word—His infallible
word. When we find that David stole his friend’s
wife and then murdered his friend; when we find that

he was a robber and adulterer, we can say,
uWhen

you prove that God did not use David as the channel

of His inspiration, it will be time enough to talk about

God not using bad Popes as the channel of His infalli-

bility.”

Infallibility not Inspiration.

Infallibility does not mean inspiration. By inspira-

tion we mean much the same as revelation. It means

that God inspired the man with thoughts and with

ideas which are the thoughts and the ideas of God,



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 23

and that in that state he may speak these

thoughts and ideas, or he may write them down, and

thus spoken or written, they are God’s words.

Now, we do not believe when the Pope speaks in-

fallibly he is inspired by God. We do not believe that
God puts in his mind thoughts or ideas which He has
to speak. Infallibility is not inspiration. Infallibility

simply means the power of not failing, the power of

not saying that this is the truth when it is not the

truth. Infallibility, to come down to the last anal-

ysis, means simply this: That when the Pope says

that a certain doctrine has been revealed already by

Jesus Christ, when he declares that doctrine to the

whole Church, then we believe that God protects him

so that he cannot make a mistake. He deals with a
question of fact. The question of fact comes before

him in this shape : Is it true that Christ said so and

so ? Is it true that Christ told the Church to teach

this doctrine ? We believe that when the Pope says,
“ Yes, it is true that Christ told the Church to teach

that doctrine,” the Pope cannot make a mistake
;
be-

cause, if he could make a mistake and say to the
whole world in the plenitude of his authority as the

representative of Christ, and as the govering power

of the whole Church, Christ taught this,” when

really He did not teach it, would it not be true then
that Christ’s revelation had failed, and that power

which He placed in His Church to save it from error
had, “de facto,” led into error.

If the Pope is not infallible when he thus speaks,

then the idea of a revelation is completely lost. And it
is in this sense and in this sense only, to preserve the

certainty of revelation that we hold that the Pope is
infallible.

“Ex Cathedra. ,,

Now, there is another thing that we must remem-
ber : The Pope is not always infallible. For instance,

the Supreme Court of this State, or of this country, is

made up of men. When they give their opinion on a



34 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

point of law, their opinion is conclusive. But it does

not follow from this that all their opinions are judg-

ments. It does not follow that all the opinions they

give cannot be reviewed. For instance they may ut-
ter very many opinions when they are reading the
morning paper at breakfast, but nobody thinks of put-

ting down those opinions as decisions of the Supreme

Court. They may write letters to their friends. They
may even have the misfortune of writing a book, and
some of them may write a historical book. But that

does not prove that what they say in that letter or in

that book is not subject to revision. There is only

one writer of a book who is infallible; there is only one

writer whose opinions, no matter what they are, are

not subject to revision, and that is the writer who

makes it a point to pitch into the Pope of Borne.

So the Pope in his ordinary character as a man, or

in his ordinary character as a scholar, may give vent
to opinions—even on theological questions—may put
them down in books, may even write them in letters
and send them here and there. It does not follow that

these opinions are infallible. He can make a mistake
in them, just as any other man can, and many of the
Popes have made mistakes in this way. But when the

Pope acts as Supreme Court, when he speaks, as they

say, “ ex cathedra”—which means when he speaks
“from the chair,” or, as they say in the Supreme

Court, “from the bench,” when he speaks as the

teacher of Christendom, and speaks for faith and mor-

ality, then, and then only, it is that he is infallible.

Not Science.

Another point we must remember, that our blessed

Lord did not come on earth to teach, for instance, the

spelling book. He did not come on earth to teach sci-
ence. He did not come on earth to give a new theory
of political government. He came on earth to teach
religion, and He Himself says that we should give to
Caesar what is Caesar’s, and that we should give to

God what is God’s. Therefore, when the Pope speaks



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 25

infallibly his subject must not be any of those things

about which Christ has given no revelation. He may
be as fallible in his spelling as some of his opponents.

If he wants to he may even spell phonetically, and his
attribute of infallibility is not touched thereby.

He may give false opinions about the sciences. He
may teach, for instance, that the earth is flat, or that
the sun moves around it; and still that has nothing to

do with his infallibility. Christ has not promised any

assistance in the teaching of science; and, therefore,

when the Pope teaches science he does it like any

other ordinary man, and his opinion is just as much

open to criticism and correction as that of any other

man.

But when he speaks as the supreme teacher of

Christendom, and defines the matter of faith and mor-

als, that there is something which we should believe

and something which God tells us should be done, then,

in order to preserve the unity and the purity and the

identity of Christ’s revelation, we can then believe,

and common sense backs us up in our belief, that the

Pope should be infallible.

There is one other point that I want to touch upon,

but I am afraid I have kept you too long already.

Civil Allegiance.

Twenty-five years ago, when the Pope had defined

this doctrine of infallibility, you remember, a great

hubbub was raised that Catholics could not be loyal

citizens. Some of the politicians, for aims of their

own—for they always have aims of their own—got it
into their heads that it would be a splendid cry to go

to the country with, that Catholics were divided in

their allegiance, and that they were divided through

this wicked old Pope of Rome, who wanted them to

bow down before him and believe that every word he

said was true. They gravely told the people : “The

Pope is now declared infallible. Therefore, whenever
the Pope says ‘ Boo ! ’ all the Catholics have to hide

their heads. They have no longer any free will of



26 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

their own. They can no longer have an opinion about

politics or science or anything else; the Pope does all

their thinking for them. They may rent out their
brains to Protestant scholars. They have no further

use for them, because now Rome will simply say to
them, ‘ Do this/ and they will have to do it.”

I am sorry to say that this idea of Papal infallibility
is not yet extinct. There are a great many people
who cling to it, though perhaps in another form. Their

idea—and I have heard it expressed by men who are
supposed to be men of light and leading—is that all
Catholics have, as it were, wires attached to them,

and that when the Pope, and especially the Jesuits,

begin to pull these wires the Catholics must jump as

these wires are pulled. This is a common idea about
the doctrine of infallibility.

Let me say right here that twenty-five years ago
the great Cardinal Manning, the friend of the poor,

the friend of the workingman telegraphed across to

America, when a pamphlet was brought out attack-

ing the loyalty of Catholics. His words were : “The

civil allegiance of Catholics is the same after the

definition of infallibility as it was before it. And the
civil allegiance of Catholics is as undivided as the

civil allegiance of any other body of men.”

Now let me ask, in the name of common sense,
what connection can there be between our civil allegi-

ance and the fact that the Pope can say that Christ

revealed this or revealed that? Every man who be-
lieves in the Bible, believes that the words of Christ

are infallible. He believes that they are the very
words that Christ spoke. Would any one be so foolish

as to say that a man who goes to his Bible and be-
lieves in the infallibility of the words contained there,

must be a bad citizen ? And what more do we say
the Pope can do ? He can merely say what Christ
has already said. And if, in nineteen hundred years,
the words of Christ have gone out to the world and

have been as a fruitful seed falling into the furrows of

time, so that men and nations have sprung up there-



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 27

from all free, all independent, all working out their

own destiny without interference, from His word and

from His gospel, are we to say that in these later

days that gospel is to destroy the people ?

Authority and Infallibility.

There are two things which non-Catholics always

confound, and that is the authority of the Pope with

the infallibility of the Pope. We believe that, besides
being the guardian of revelation, the Pope is head of

the Church. He has authority in spiritual matters.

He has not, by the commission of Christ, the smallest

shred or tatter of temporal authority. No matter

how many quotations men may bring from the middle

ages, and no matter how they may season them and

salt them and spice them to suit modern taste, it can-

not be proved that it was ever taught as a doctrine

of the Catholic Church that the Pope had temporal

authority over temporal things. The very men whom
modern scholarship digs out of their graves and wires

their bones together as a bogie man to frighten the
American people—those very men wrote with their
own hands and with their almost inspired pens that

the power of the Pope was purely a spiritual power.

This authority, this spiritual authority of the Pope

we believe we are bound to obey. We believe that
he is to the whole world what the Bishop is to his

diocese. You never yet saw a society that did not
have some kind of a government. If five or six men
unite for any purpose they have to elect a head, and

they must have by-laws, and they must have some one

to enforce those by-laws.

So in the Catholic Church we have the Pope as the

Supreme governor, who oversees all things connected
with the Church, and it is his care that all things

should go well in the Church. Then we have under
him the Bishops who are in the various dioceses over
which they are placed what the Pope is to the world.

We believe that when the Pope speaks and directs
that this should bo done and that should be done and



88 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE .

the other should be done in spiritual affairs, that it is

our duty to obey him. But at the same time, we

never think of saying that he never makes a mistake

in those matters. He is not infallible in his acts; he
is not infallible in his deeds; he is not infallible in his

policy. He has prudence—a prudence supernatural
—a prudence which has been the wonder of the whole
world; but he may make mistakes in his public policy.
And, though you find Catholics obeying him, and obey-

ing him readily, you find that they also retain their

Christian liberty to protest. And I am greatly afraid
that if some of these people who imagine that the

Pope does nothing but sit up in the dome of St.

Peter’s in Rome and pull all the strings, were sitting
in his place for a half hour, and had to deal with the

children of the Church, using their Christian liberty

of saying what they think, that they would not find it

a very easy position.

So, therefore, if the Pope tells us to do this or tells

us to do that we have always, of course to receive his
commands with reverence, and with respect, just as

a dutiful child will receive the commands of his father.

But there is one thing, and the Catholic Church

guards it and will guard it to the very end. That be-

tween God and a man’s conscience neither Pope nor

priest) nor king can come.

Conscience.

God gave us our reason to tell us, to interpret to

us His divine laws, both natural and revealed. And
if at any time that reason, that conscience tells us

that some command given to us is wrong and should

not be done, it does not matter who gives the com-

mand, we should not do it. And if our conscience tells
us that a certain line of action is the right one, and

that it is incumbent upon us to carry it out, even

though that line carries us straight from the Pope, if

we do not do it we shall suffer damnation.

The Catholic theory of conscience is the only theory

which is compatible with free men. There are some



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE . 29
r*

who would deliver us, bound hand and foot, to the

State. What is the State ? State means condition,
and there are all sorts and kinds of conditions. These

United States form a State. Turkey is a State.

Armenia is a State, and a sad state, too. Those men

who speak about the rights of the State are very

careful not to define what the State means. And one
of them has said that if the State should prohibit him

from paying his worship to Almighty God he would

meekly close up his hands together, cast down his

eyes and retire into his closet.

Therefore, when the State in Turkey goes out into

the mountains and slaughters the unfortunate Chris-

tians because they are Christians we are wrong in

raising the voice of indignation. The business of

these Armenians is to fold their hands and cast down

their eyes and bend their necks so that the Kurdish

horsemen shall ride over them.

Now the Catholic theory of conscience is that a man
has the right before God to preserve that conscience

inviolate, and, though he be torn limb from limb, and

though like the martyrs, he suffer all the agonies of a

thousand deaths, it is not lawful for him to basely sur-

render his reason or to betray the conscience which

God gave him into his charge.

Allegiance.

As I have said, the infallibility of the Pope has abso-
lutely nothing to do with our civil or our temporal

allegiance. And I will conclude now by reiterating
that neither has the authority of the Pope, that

spiritual authority of the Pope, anything to do with

our civil or our temporal allegiance either. We are
as free and as undivided ih that allegiance as is any

other class in the community which believes that

there is a God above them. And I think that history
bears out what I say. For nigh three months men
have been endeavoring to find some proof against the

loyalty of Catholics and, let me ask you, though they
have had one hundred and twenty years of national



80 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE.

existence in this land, have they dared to produce

one traitor ? If infallibility makes us disloyal, if be-

cause we love the Pope we cannot be true to the flag,

surely one hundred and twenty years must have

brought out at least one Benedict Arnold.

Ah, thank God; no !

Sheridan and the Parson.

One of those who wrote against the Church and

who ransacked his notes which were taken years and

years ago, and which have been lying in innocuous

desuetude ever since, said if that man, whose name

we cannot hear without cheering—that sterling little
soldier of whom every Catholic is proud, Phil Sheri-
dan, had been met on that day when he was sweeping

down the valley of the Shenandoah by a Catholic

priest he might have turned back. I happened to be

reading the memoirs of Phil Sheridan, I am a very
peaceful man, and like all peaceful men I like to read
about battles. I was reading that on that day at

Winchester, when Sheridan was riding in full speed to

retrieve the battle, he met a clergyman—and it was
not a Catholic clergyman either; it was the parson

who was chaplain of the regiment, and Sheridan

stopped him and asked him where he was going. He
did not answer the question, but he said, “ Every-

thing will be all right, general, when you get there.”

But Sheridan remarks, and very justly, that though

his words were very consoling, the parson didn’t stop

in his ride for the rear.

As I said if there were anything in our principles

or in our teachings which would make us disloyal to
this republic they would have brought the proof of it

long before this. But from the fact that they have

not, from the fact that our record is clean, from the

fact that we have no traitor amongst us, I say that

men who attack us should think twice before putting

their pens to paper. Infallibility, the power of the

Pope, only makes us the better citizens. Let us

remember that if we have a State at all, if we have a



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE . 31

political existence, if we have civilized governments,

if we have liberty, we owe it to the struggle which

the old Church made.

You remember that when the barbarians came

down from the North and swept out Roman civiliza-
tion, buried it under the ashes of its noblest monu-

ments, it was then that the Popes rose to the occa-

sion; it was then that they went out and met the

barbarian flood, and turned it aside into the paths of

peace. They sent out missionaries to teach these

wild men of the forest, and to raise them up in the

arts of civilized life. There is not a language which

we speak that the Church of Cod did not first put

into writing.

There is not an art which flourishes amongst us

that has not its beginning in the cloisters. There is

not a government nor a liberty of the people for

which Popes have not fought to keep intact and for

which, in fact, many of them have laid down their

lives.

The history of the Papacy is a glorious history.

Conjure up to your mind’s eye that wonderful pro-

cession which stretches back unbroken to the very

cradle of empire. A long line and a glorious line they
form; strong men, with heads uplifted, many with the
red robes which tell of the martyr’s death. They

have not had wealth or arms to support them, and

yet they have guided the destinies of the world. They

were but poor bishops left in a decayed capital, yet

they lifted Europe out of the dust. To-day a repre-

sentative of that glorious line sits a captive in his so-

called palace, the Vatican, yet almost four hundred

millions of hearts beat lovingly for him, and their

eyes are turned with affection toward the figure of

Leo the Thirteenth.

He sums up, as it were, all that the old Popes have
been, and his word has always been lifted up in be-

half of the people. Men speak about the difference
between the Pope and our American Constitution.

Men say that Papal ideas are not in accordance with



THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE .

our American laws. Yet this Pope, Leo XIII, who
ctesires not favor from any man by speaking untruth,
has said publicly to the nations of Europe, “Look at

the Constitution of the United States; there is your

model.”

They tell us that the Papacy is failing. They have

specified the hour and the day, and they assure us

that this doctrine of infallibility has been the last nail

driven in the Pope’s coffin. It seems to me otherwise.

It seems to me that when we consider the world to-
day how men and women are looking for the truth,
earnestly searching for it, tossed about by every

wind, tossed about in that unstable sea of human

opinion, that it is a glorious thing that they can turn

their eyes to the old rock of Peter which rises high

and secure above every wave. For two thousand

years, almost, it has braved the seas. The gates of

hell have surged against it and have surged in vain.

The Emperors of Rome tried to sweep it away in a
torrent "of blood, but Rome went and the old rock re-
mained. The barbarian flood almost overwhelmed it,

but that flood settled down around about it, and the

rock of Peter rose, more glorious, more imposing than

ever before. In our days men’s voices and men’s pens

are lifted up against it, but they cannot prevail

against its adamant sides.

The storms of centuries have not shattered it nor

scarred it. Are men’s words to rend it asunder now?

No, ladies and gentlemen; it has been placed by the

right of God, it has been placed to outlast all storms,

to outlast all time. Its guardian is Peter, upon

whose head there are no gray hairs, whose youth is

renewed like unto the youth of the eagle, whose feet

are as the feet of harts and underneath whom are the
everlasting arms of God.