1. It is de fide that the plenitude of jurisdiction was given to Peter and his successors; and that its exercise over the whole body, pastors and people, imports no separation or disunion from the Body. How then should the exercise of infallibility, which is attached to that jurisdiction, import separation?
2. Again, it is de fide that this supreme jurisdiction and infallibility was given to maintain and perpetuate the unity of the Church. How then can its exercise produce separation, which it is divinely ordained to prevent?
It is therefore de fide that its exercise excludes separation, and binds the whole Church, both Body and Head, in closer bonds of communion, doctrine and faith.
3. Lastly, it is de fide that in the assistance promised to Peter and his successors, all the means necessary for its due exercise are contained. An infallible office fallibly exercised is a contradiction in terms. The infallibility of the head consists in this, that he is guided both as to the means and as to the end. It is therefore contrary to faith to say, that the independent exercise of this office, divinely assisted, can import separation or disunion of any kind. It is a part of the promise, that in the selection of the means of its exercise, the successor of Peter will not err. If he erred as to the means, either he would err as to the end, or he would be preserved only by a series of miracles. In escaping from the supernatural, the objectors fall into the miraculous. The Catholic doctrine of infallibility invokes no such interventions. It affirms that a Divine assistance, pro-
