Is everything the pope says infallible? I read somewhere that only the things said by the pope about dogmas and doctrines are infallible but not on disciplinary matters. Do this mean us catholics can disobey him if his teachings are on disciplinary matters? In the history of the Catholic Church, were there "bad" popes? Who defines "bad popes" considering our morality is based on the teachings of the Catholic Church? Are there investigations that can be done on "bad popes"(like impeachment in the case of public officials or in the case of the military the second-in-command can declare the captain intellectually incapacitated or something..)?

thanks and God Bless!

-- janeiro (janeiro_a@rocketmail.com), March 30, 2004

Answers

Hi janeiro,

Infallibility is the word used to describe, in general, certain Church teachings (about faith or morals) that will never suffer contrary change by any subsequent Catholic authority. It also signifies the strength of assent required. From the Code of Canon Law:

"Can. 750 §1. A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.

§2. Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firm-ly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church."

"Do this mean us catholics can disobey him if his teachings are on disciplinary matters?"

Nope, but our assent to such things is of a different kind:

"Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.

Can. 753 Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops."

...and this is why it is not very useful to argue about whether a teaching is infallible or not. Infallibility is only one aspect of a teaching's truth.

Elizabeth Ascombe put it very nicely in her d efense of Humanae Vitae:

"Among those who hoped for a change, there was an instant reaction that the Pope's teaching was false, and was not authoritative because it lacked the formal character of an infallible document. Now as to that, the Pope was pretty solemnly confirming the only and constant teaching of the Church. The fact that an encyclical is not an infallible kind of document only shows that one argument for the truth of its teaching is lacking. It does not show that the substantive hard message of this encyclical may perhaps be wrong - any more than the fact that memory of telephone numbers isn't the sort of thing that you can't be wrong about shows that you don't actually know your own telephone number."

-- anon (ymous@God.bless), March 30, 2004.

I will correct that. :)

-- anon (ymous@God.bless), March 30, 2004.

okay, here goes...

Is everything the pope says infallible?

The simple and sagacious answer: no.

I read somewhere that only the things said by the pope about dogmas and doctrines are infallible but not on disciplinary matters.

That would be correct.

Do this mean us catholics can disobey him if his teachings are on disciplinary matters?

no, as catholics we are required to give our assent to ALL catholic teachings on discipline, dogma, and general morality... whether declared ex cathedra or not.

In the history of the Catholic Church, were there "bad" popes?

Yes, there were popes who were immoral people. They never lived long enough to teach false doctrines. Those immoral popes who did live to teach doctrines at least taught true doctrines that are still in place today. (thats the joy of infallable dogmatic interpretation... NO ONE can destroy what is protected by the Holy Spirit).

Who defines "bad popes" considering our morality is based on the teachings of the Catholic Church?

Nobody officially. Its more or less a general concensus in hindsight

Are there investigations that can be done on "bad popes"(like impeachment in the case of public officials or in the case of the military the second-in-command can declare the captain intellectually incapacitated or something..)?

no. Popes are in office until the time that they voluntarily retire or die. It has happened that several popes have died right after being appointed, or right before teaching on dogma (God might be a harsh boss).

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), March 30, 2004.

Hi janeiro,

Infallibility is the word used to describe, in general, certain Church teachings (about faith or morals) that will never suffer contrary change by any subsequent Catholic authority. It also signifies the strength of assent required. From the Code of Canon Law:

"Can. 750 §1. A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.

§2. Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firm-ly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church."

"Do this mean us catholics can disobey him if his teachings are on disciplinary matters?"

Nope, but our assent to such things is of a different kind:

"Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.

Can. 753 Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops."

...and this is why it is not very useful to argue about whether a teaching is infallible or not. Infallibility is only one aspect of a teaching's truth.

Elizabeth Ascombe put it very nicely in her d efense of Humanae Vitae:

"Among those who hoped for a change, there was an instant reaction that the Pope's teaching was false, and was not authoritative because it lacked the formal character of an infallible document. Now as to that, the Pope was pretty solemnly confirming the only and constant teaching of the Church. The fact that an encyclical is not an infallible kind of document only shows that one argument for the truth of its teaching is lacking. It does not show that the substantive hard message of this encyclical may perhaps be wrong - any more than the fact that memory of telephone numbers isn't the sort of thing that you can't be wrong about shows that you don't actually know your own telephone number."

-- anon (ymous@God.bless), March 30, 2004.