[metmom]

The Catholic church may claim that it has spoken infallibly x number of times, but nobody knows for sure but God.

And even if they have spoken infallibly, the same problem arises in interpreting their *infallible* declarations as interpreting infallible Scripture. That is, that the person hearing or reading it isn’t interpreting it infallibly, so nothing is gained by adding another layer of infallibility.

At that point, you might as well stick to just Scripture and not any any other layers of claimed infallibility, which can’t be proved anyway. Their say so that it’s an infallible declaration is just their opinion.

[Alex Murphy]

The Code of Canon Law provides that "No doctrine is understood to be infallibly defined unless it is clearly established as such" (CIC 749 § 3), and i do not dispute that at least two (MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS; Ineffabilis Deus) are accepted as being such, but as the disputes show, this is still a matter of some interpretation, as there is no infallible canon of all infallible decrees, and which would detail which certain sections of promulgations are.

I have been told that there may be as many as seven instances of a papal ex cathedra infallible statement. I say "may be", because it seems no Catholic authority can agree on which pronouncements are infallible and which are not. When pressed for details, I was directed to a Wikipedia article on the subject, sadly. I guess Catholics consider Wikipedia to be canonical on the subject.

So is the Pope above criticism? Is he infallible?

The short answer is "he's almost never infallible."

The longer answer is "he's only infallible when speaking ex cathedra and when speaking of doctrine specifically [government, politics and economics don't qualify as doctrine]. Only the Magisterium, when viewed as a whole over time, is held to be 100% infallible."

The detailed answer is that 99.9% of all papal statements aren't made ex cathedra. The possibility (and opportunity) always exists that the Pope will speak in error doctrinally, if he's not speaking ex cathedra - and there have only been a handful of ex cathedra statements made in the entire history of the Catholic Church (remembering that infallible teachings must by definition be on dogma and doctrine). Thus, the possibility that any pope will speak in error regarding political and economic issues is [statistically speaking] a rock solid 100%, according to the doctrine of papal infallibility. There's no reason to say that Pope Benedict XVI can't be advocating socialism, and I think the recent is pretty clear that even if he's not outright promoting it, he's certainly in support of it. I'm afraid that all too many Catholics push their admiration of the Pope into idol worship, believing that the Pope speaks impeccably in all matters. As one FReeper explained it to me years ago, "papal impeccability is not a Catholic dogma."

But in the end, the final answer to the question of "So is the Pope above criticism? Is he infallible?" is "Shut up and kiss the ring." No one is permitted to question the Vicar of Christ's guidance. If he says that

- food and the access to water are a universal right of all humans,
- abandoning mechanisms of wealth redistribution will hinder the achievement of lasting development
- technologically advanced societies can and must lower their domestic energy consumption
- labor unions should expand their influence over those outside their membership, and beyond national boundaries,
- a reform of the United Nations Organization is necessary, likewise a reform of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the "family of nations" can acquire real teeth.

as he did in his recent encyclical Caritas in veritate, you'll be expected to step aside and let the centralists and socialists take over. Your eternal salvation is in jeopardy if you don't go along with whatever he says, whenever he says it.

-- Alex Murphy, October 31, 2009