A question for Catholics.

[Sigel]

The election of the new Pope got me wondering. Do Catholics nowadays still accept the concept of Papal infallibility? I mean everything the Pope says is "the word of God", or do most Catholics hold a more pragmatic opinion?

[Ederico]

I'll leave the other more knowledgable and experienced members respond to this as I am still reading and researching on the matter. From the little I know that the doctrine of Papal Infallibility does not relate to whatever the Pope states.

[Milesian]

Every Catholic must hold to the doctrine of Papal infallibility. It has been an official dogma since the First Vatican Council and as such it is now de fide

However, like most people (even everyday Catholics included) your concept of what Papal Infallibility means is incorrect.
It does not mean that the Pope is always correct. It is actually a very complicated doctrine to understand. However, Catholics are fully aware that the Pope is a human being like the rest of us and can make mistakes as easily as you or me.

The role of the Pope must be understood as that of a "guardian" of the Faith.
On certain conditions, he may invoke the Holy Spirit to protect him from proclaiming error as truth (and there is a Biblical justification for this practise). However, it doesn't mean that the Pope is always right or that his own personal opinions are always correct. Papal Infallibility is actually invoked very rarely.

[Sigel]

Originally Posted by Milesian

like most people (even everyday Catholics included) your concept of what Papal Infallibility means is incorrect.

Thanks Milesian, I confess, I've no idea. How would you explain the concept, in layman's terms, to an outsider?

[Milesian]

Originally Posted by Sigel

Thanks Milesian, I confess, I've no idea. How would you explain the concept, in layman's terms, to an outsider?

I'm not sure it is possible to explain it simply and clearly in layman's terms.
But you could do a lot worse than consult the Catholic Encyclopedia:


http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm

[Sigel]

Originally Posted by Catholic Encyclopedia

It should be observed in conclusion that papal infallibility is a personal and incommunicable charisma, which is not shared by any pontifical tribunal. It was promised directly to Peter, and to each of Peter's successors in the primacy, but not as a prerogative the exercise of which could be delegated to others. Hence doctrinal decisions or instructions issued by the Roman congregations, even when approved by the pope in the ordinary way, have no claim to be considered infallible. To be infallible they must be issued by the pope himself in his own name according to the conditions already mentioned as requisite for ex cathedra teaching.

Interesting link. Seems to be the divine (via Peter) hand upon him.

[Phlegethon]

Originally Posted by Sigel

or do most Catholics hold a more pragmatic opinion?

[Milesian]

Originally Posted by Sigel

Interesting link. Seems to be the divine (via Peter) hand upon him.

Indeed. I believe it is based upon the promises Christ made, namely that he would send the "Spirit of Truth" to dwell within his Church for all time, as well as commands that the Church should be obeyed for all time. Thus the Catholic Church deduces that Christ would not have commaned such a thing if his Church could become corrupt and lead people astray. Similarly, if the "Spirit of Truth" (ie Holy Spirit) resided in that Church then it must perform a function for the preservation of truth against error, which would be God's guarantee that the previous instruction could be obeyed in good conscience.

That is what Papal Infallibility is, the invoking of the "Spirit of Truth" to protect the Pope from proclaiming error to be true dogma.
As mentioned, Papal infallibility only operates under certain conditions and is actually invoked quite rarely. It doesn't mean the Pope is always right, as is commonly misunderstood.

[Sigel]

Originally Posted by Milesian

As mentioned, Papal infallibility only operates under certain conditions and is actually invoked quite rarely. It doesn't mean the Pope is always right, as is commonly misunderstood.

Thanks Milesian, that’s a bit clearer now. I don’t know if this has ever happened but how would the infallibility be viewed if a certain Pope passed a judgement and then a subsequent Pope chose to throw it out?
Would it be a case of the Holy Spirit having a change of heart?

[Milesian]

Originally Posted by Sigel

Thanks Milesian, that’s a bit clearer now. I don’t know if this has ever happened but how would the infallibility be viewed if a certain Pope passed a judgement and then a subsequent Pope chose to throw it out?
Would it be a case of the Holy Spirit having a change of heart?

Glad to have helped clear it up a little

One would have to first examine if they were both speaking Ex Cathedra.
I can't think of anytime that has happened. In such cases, whatever was pronounced through the Extraordinary Magistereum takes precedence, I believe.

If neither were exercising Infallibility then the Pope who was following closest to what th eChurch has always said would likely be considered to be giving the correct definition