‘Infallible!’ or ‘Infallible?’
What does it mean when we say the Pope is infallible? It means, basically, that the Holy Fathers teachings on faith and morals can be pronounced a ‘no-go-area’ for the faithful. If the Holy Father declares a teaching on faith or morals as connected to Divine Revelation then that teaching is ‘infallible’. This doesn’t mean however that the Pope can’t be wrong…just that if a teaching stays within certain perimeters it can be pronounced infallible if he so chooses.
This doctrine was defined dogmatically in Vatican I of the 19th century and has only been used once….by Pius XII. Pope Pius spoke on the Assumption of Mary as an article of faith which defines the faith and so this belief is central to belonging to the Catholic Church.
Whether or not one agrees with the views of a Pontiff, when something is spoken ex-cathedra on concepts of faith and morals they are beliefs we must share to be members of the group of believers we call the Catholic Church. This may seem a bit much to swallow but if we all have different beliefs then how can we claim communion as one faith?….the answer: we can’t.
For someone to say that they’re Catholic is to say the Nicene Creed and, since Pius, to profess their faith in Mary as the ‘Queen of Heaven’.
Tuesday, July 10th, 2007 and is filed under Rome.
You can leave a comment.
daniel Says:
when i read such articles it just yet again confirms
why i am a lapsed catholic. infact, i would go as far as to say that most catholics i know just would not agree with the above comments. people will always have a broad view on any dictate. it is not treason it is reason or maybe defined as FREE WILL. surely the most important part the church can play is being a refuge for questionable sinners and not a haven for hellfire frigthened agreeable saints.
August 31st, 2007 at 12:46 pm
Ronan Says:
Reading back over this blog I think I failed in giving a real account of my opinion. The idea of a ‘Church’ where any alternate view is considered treason is as abhorent to me as it seems to daniel. My only comment is this:
There must be some set of beliefs which constitute Catholics. For example: Transubstantiation. It is one thing to say that we are all Christians but must we not agree on certain key teachings to be recognised as ‘Catholic’.
I couldn’t agee more though about a “refuge for questionable sinners”. I did mention this belief in another blog.
January 26th, 2008 at 6:34 pm