The following excerpts are taken from:
Joseph Fessler, The True and False Infallibility of
the Popes: A Controversial Reply to Dr. Schulte (3d ed.; trans. Ambrose St.
John; 1875)
Extract
from a Brief addressed to Bishop Fessler by his Holiness Pope Pius IX.
April 27,
1871.
‘. . . . . Peropportunum autem et utilissimum
existimavimus retudisse te audaciam Professoris Schulte incitantis saeculares
Potestates adversus dogma Pontificiæ infallibilitatis ab œcumenicâ Vaticanâ
Synodo definitæ. Non omnes enim,
interlaicos præsertim, rei indolem perspectam habent ; et veritas luculenter
exposita multas abigere solet ab honestorum mentibus obliquas opinones, sæpe
cum lacte haustas, aliosque confirmare in rectâ sententiâ et adversus insidias
munire. Quamobrem si hujusmondi commenta
refellere pergas, optime certe merebis de santissima religione nostrâ et
Christiano populo, quem, uti bonus Pastor, a venenatis pascuis abduces. Pergratum Nos tibi profitemur animum, cum ob
volumen oblatum, tum ob amantissimas litteras tuas; tibique amplam apprecamur
obsequii devotionisque tuæ mercedem. . . ..’
Translation.
‘. . . . .We esteem it a very opportune and useful thing to have
beaten back the audacity of Professor Schulte, inciting as he does the secular
powers against the dogma of Papal Infallibility, as defined by the Ecumenical
Council of the Vatican. For it is a
matter the true meaning of which, no all men, and especially not all laymen,
have a thoroughly clear understanding of, and the truth, when lucidly set
forth, is wont to expel from properly constituted minds opinions which men
perhaps have drunk in with their mother’s milk, to confirm others in a right
mind, and fortify them against insidious attacks. Wherefore, if you continue to refute figments
of this kind, you will deserve well of our most holy religion, and of all
Christian people, in that, like a good pastor, you withdraw them from poisoned
pastures. We make known to you, then,
the great pleasure you have given Us, both by reason of the book which you have
presented to Us, as well as by reason of your most affectionate letters; and We
pray that you may receive a rich reward for your deference to Our authority and
devotion towards Ourselves. . . . .’
(Signed by the Pope’s own hand.)
Note. – The fact of the Brief and its signature is derived from M.
Anton. Erdinger, director of the
Episcopal Seminary at St. Polten, author of the Life of Bishop Fessier, who
sent a copy of it to M.Cosquin of the Français, to whom I am indebted for these
important notices. The Pope’s Brief is
not given entire, as the remainder of it has reference solely to local diocesan
affairs.
From “Translator’s
Introduction”:
This important work of the lamented Dr. Fessler, Bishop of St. Polten,
or more properly St. Hippolytus, in Austria, who was Secretary-General to the
Vatican Council in the year 1870, and who, worn out with the fatigues of the
Council, died two years afterwards, is now for the first time brought before
the notice of English Catholics.
How to recognize
if a document/statement is ex cathedra:
It will hardly surprise any one
who has perused Dr. Schulte’s explanatory Preface to his work to be told that Dr. Schulte’s very
starting-point is unsound and misleading. He assumes, he says, that each
individual Catholic Christian must be able, without the intervention of bishop
or priest—i.e. without having recourse to any teaching authority in the Church—to
recognise at once what is an ex cathedrâ utterance of the Pope; and this
‘because each one has to work out his own salvation.’
Were Dr. Schulte to say that his
meaning in these words is (even if he has not said so expressly) that every
Catholic can by the assistance of the Church’s teaching office (i.e. through
her bishops and priests) learn what is a Papal utterance ex cathedrâ,
and therefore infallible, even in the face of conflicting difficulties, then
indeed he would explain and rectify his position; but were he to admit this,
then indeed he would certainly arrive at a different result from that at which
he has actually arrived.
For the bishops and priests are
quite aware that when there is no authentic explanation of a Papal ex
cathedrâ utterance, the Theological Faculty, which has been for centuries
engaged upon this question, has to be heard upon the marks of a real utterance;
and that in reality the short de fide definition in the Vatican Council
in its few words does but contain what the science of Theology has been this
long time investigating at great length, with the full knowledge and admission
of the difficult questions arising out of the history of ancient times. But we
shall look in vain, as Dr. Schulte from his own experience admits, if we wish
to find from History of Theology that such Papal utterances are to be
recognised, sometimes from the words used, sometimes from the circumstances,
and sometimes from the definition itself, as though each one of these marks was
of itself sufficient to establish the fact.
On our part, we find that it is the view of Catholic theologians that
there are two marks of an ex cathedrâ utterance, and, moreover,
that these two marks must both be found together—viz. that (1) the objectum
or subject-matter of the decision must be doctrine of faith or morals; and (2)
the Pope must express his intention, by virtue of his supreme teaching power,
to declare this particular doctrine on faith and morals to be a component part
of the truth necessary to salvation revealed by God, and as such to be held by
the whole Catholic Church, he must publish it, and so give a formal definition in
the matter (definire). These two marks must be found together. Any mere
circumstances do not suffice to enable a person to recognise what a Pope says
as an utterance ex cathedrâ, or, in other words, as a de fide definition.
It is only when the two other marks just mentioned are acknowledged to be present
that the circumstances of the case serve to support and strengthen the proof of
the Pope’s intention; and this intention will be made known by his own words.
Should, however, these marks not give
us a certainty absolutely free from all doubt as to whether, in a certain case,
there is a Papal utterance ex cathedrâ, then will the subordinate
teaching authority of the Church have recourse to the highest Authority
himself, to ask him what his intention was in such an utterance,* or to ask
whether a formal Papal utterance on such and such a matter is to be looked upon
as ex cathedrâ. (pp. 50-52)
Note on p. 52:
* Such an appeal to the Pope is
not, then, so absurd as Dr. Schulte says; on the contrary, where there is a
supreme authority, it is quite intelligible and reasonable on the part of the Pope’s
subordinates in matters on which a doubt might arise on the applicability of
the Pope’s intention to a particular case, although in the first instance the
intention was clearly expressed.
(Of course Bishop Fessler is here
understood as meaning that this fresh explanation of the definition must be
provided with all the marks which are necessary to prove the presence of a real
definition; just as in a will any alteration or explanation forming part of a
will, must be attested by the same witnesses and with the same formalities as
were required for the original document. TRANSLATOR.)
Papal Infallibility and the Deposit of Faith (cf. DS
3070):
Having made his own exposition of
notes of a definition, Dr. Schulte proceeds to assert ‘that only the Pope
himself can define the subject-matter, the comprehensiveness, and the limits of
an utterance ex cathedrâ.’ This assertion is so far true, that it is
certain that no human authority can prescribe anything to the Pope in this
matter. If, however, it is meant that the Pope, according to his own will and
fancy, can at all events extend his infallible definition even to matters
relating to the Jus publicum, to which the divine revelation does not
extend, then he has laid the case before us quite erroneously. The Pope, in his
doctrinal utterances, only speaks what he finds under the special divine
assistance, to be already part of the truth revealed by God necessary for
salvation, which He has given in trust to the Catholic Church (i.e. in
the divine depositum fidei). The same assistance of God which securely
preserves the Pope from error preserves him with equal security from declaring that
to be revealed by God, and intrusted to the keeping of the Catholic Church
as a matter of truth or morals, which God has not revealed and has not
deposited in His Church. (p. 53)
