Papal Infallibility

A Guide for Catholic Apologists

Table of Contents

1. Conditions for Papal Infallibility

2. The Necessity of an Infallible Judge

3. Biblical Foundations

4. Infallible vs Authoritative

5. The Ordinary and Universal Magisterium

6. Proof from an Ecumenical Council

7. Proof from St. Maximus the Confessor

8. Conclusion

9. Key Takeaways

There is perhaps no more poorly articulated doctrine among Catholic apologists than Papal Infallibility. There is a tendency to either under-explain it or over-convolute it. Furthermore, if Papal Infallibility does not go hand in hand with a discussion on Papal Authority, then someone can have wrong ideas about when they are bound to obey a Pope or another Bishop. It is important to nail this topic, and I will endeavor to do so in this article. Properly articulated, Papal Infallibility can lead to conversion instead of aversion to Rome.

Here are the key conditions for a papal statement to be infallible:

Ex Cathedra (From the Chair of St. Peter)

• The Pope must be speaking as the universal pastor and teacher of all Christians

  • Thus, any personal opinions, casual remarks, homilies and even most writings, including the vast majority of Papal Encyclicals, are not infallible.

Faith and Morals

• The teaching must pertain to faith or morals, not science, politics or non-doctrinal topics.

Definitive Declaration

• The Pope must explicitly state that the doctrine is binding for all Catholics.

Universality

• The teaching must be aimed at the entire Church, not simply a particular group or region.

Infallibility only applies to the very rare and specific cases that meet the above criteria. Remember these 4 items. Ex Cathedra, Faith and Morals, Definitive Declaration and Universality. This is the key thing to take away and remember from this article, but there will be objections from Protestants and Eastern Orthodox alike, so read on to arm yourself with deeper knowledge.

The Necessity of an Infallible Judge

Without a universal pastor endowed with Halakhic judgement authority from God, there can be no Church unity. The Eastern Orthodox are the best example of this. The Orthodox believe in a conciliar model of determining infallible teaching. The problem with this is that sometimes a unifier is needed, which the Orthodox prove by being unable to define what constitutes a valid baptism. The Eastern Orthodox are not truly conciliar, but are rather several papacies (patriarchies) that sometimes come to different conclusions on dogma instead of a single universal determination. The Catholic Church is quasi-conciliar, meaning that it seeks conciliarity, but through the Papacy, and the Pope can sometimes act without a council when the maintenance of unity demands it.

Protestantism is of course an even clearer example of why a universal pastor is a necessity. Protestants are spread across many denominations, which disagree on absolutely crucial doctrines. They struggle to have unity even within denominations, which is why they split off seemingly ad-infinitum. This is neither God’s plan nor God’s will for the Church.

Jesus prayed in John 17:21 “that they [the Church] all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” Since Christ is God, and the Father does not ignore Christ as God would be ignoring God, Protestant churches must profess their denomination to be the true church, or they de facto attest that they are not a church at all, from a Biblical perspective. Protestants tend to see Jesus’ prayer for His bride being “overruled” by sinful men, as if that were possible.

John 16:13 is another pertinent verse. “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.” The Holy Spirit guides the Bride into all truth. Since the Bride is the Body of Christ, as Christ and the Bride are one flesh, whatever the Church officially teaches is what God officially teaches. Thus there can be absolutely no division among the true Church on doctrine, at all. This is one reason why neither Orthodoxy nor Protestantism can be true.

Not only will Christ maintain the Bride as a pure virgin, undefiled of all doctrinal error, since Christ and the Church are one flesh trusting in the Church’s official teaching is trusting in Christ. Any time a person disagrees with the Church’s official stance, even if they are Catholic, they are disagreeing with Jesus Christ. Fallible and sinful men cannot overcome the promises of Christ, and God will not tolerate disunity in His Church. All Christians should be unified, there should be no denominations, and the truth is that there are actually no denominations, there is only the Catholic Church.

You simply cannot have unity within a single church building without a head pastor. Multiple equal-authority pastors never works in a Protestant setting, and it is failing in an Orthodox setting. The Catholic Church proves itself true every decade, as there is zero disunity in doctrine. Anyone who knowingly disagrees with a doctrinal element excommunicates themselves. This is why you cannot be a Catholic in good standing and disbelieve in the Real Presence for example. You can keep going to Mass, sure, you can keep receiving the Holy Eucharist because the Priest cannot read your soul like St. Padre Pio could, but you simply eat and drink condemnation on yourself if you do, and eventually God will not tolerate it. Heretical and schismatic Church leaders have always and will always exist, but when they disunite with the Bride on doctrine, they disunite with Christ.

Biblical Foundations

“Now where is this in the Bible?” my Protestant and Orthodox friends will rightly ask.

Acts 15.

Note that Acts 15 does not tell the behind-the-scenes story which St. Paul elaborates on in Galatians 2. But here is a summary of what happened:

Certain new Christians were Pharisee converts. Not every Pharisee rejected Jesus Christ, and some, and many who followed them, converted to Christianity in its early years. These Pharisee converts were insisting that in addition to the Gospel (which includes the commands of Jesus, such as baptism and receiving the Holy Eucharist), that all Christians, including Gentile believers, had to keep the Law of Moses. This included being circumcised as an adult male convert. Obviously, this would be very problematic for the spread of Christianity throughout the globe, as circumcision was almost exclusively a Jewish practice.

Additionally, the Law of Moses itself was radical. It was meant to separate the people of Israel from the pagans around them. Asking Gentile Christians to follow it would be akin to asking them to convert entirely to Pharisaical Judaism, plus some additional beliefs. These demands on the part of the Pharisee converts, called “Judaizers,” threatened to tear the early Church apart, and Jesus Christ was not physically present to clarify the matter. But the man Jesus Christ gave the Keys of the Kingdom to in Matthew 16 was still alive and acting as the leader of the Church, St. Peter.

Unfortunately, St. Peter was acting in accordance with the Judaizers, not in accordance with the fullness of the Gospel. So here we see the first Pope acting sinfully, as we see from hundreds of other Popes that will come after him.

Thus, St. Paul came to Jerusalem and personally rebuked St. Peter to his face for not acting in accordance with Church doctrine established by Jesus Christ. This is similar to traditionalist Cardinals getting upset with and rebuking Pope Francis today, whatever you might believe about the Pope or Cardinals views. That topic is beyond the scope of this article, I just want to show it has historical precedence and there is nothing new under the sun. The Holy Spirit used St. Paul to bring His Pope, St. Peter, the Servant of Servants, in line behaviorally, prior to making an infallible pronouncement that was:

1. Ex Cathedra - from his position as leader of all Christians.

2. On a matter of Faith and Morals.

3. A Definitive Declaration - It is implied in the story St. Peter was stating this was binding for everyone.

4. Universal - This was for all believers, Jew and Gentile.

Note that Pope St. Peter had heavy input and assistance from the other Apostles. Why is this? Because it’s the Church that is infallible. The Holy Spirit guides the Church to the proper conclusion, every single time, on all matters of faith and morals. St. Peter, as leader, ratifies the Church’s decision, and as the rock, holds a Chair that cannot be corrupted. We believe that God would prevent any Pope from promulgating a doctrinal error, likely striking him dead on the spot before he can ratify such a thing. No Pope, however worldly, wants to mess with this, and thus like St. Peter they seek input and consensus, if they are wise.

1 Timothy 3:15 says the Church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth. For the Church to be this pillar of truth, it has to have uncorrupt doctrine. The tiniest drop of doctrinal error would make it no longer true, as truth requires the absence of any error whatsoever, and 1 Timothy 3:15, Holy Spirit inspired Scripture, incorrect. So our faith in the Church is as our faith in Jesus, her King. This makes sense, since Christ and the Bride are one. Thus, we can have a radical faith in the Church. It has been almost 2000 years, and it has never promulgated a single doctrinal error.

A Protestant or Orthodox believer can try to claim it has, but not only is that nearly impossible to prove, as these are matters of faith and morals, but then they have to identify another church with pure doctrine that can trace itself back to the Apostles to replace it. The Orthodox would have the only possible claim to this, except they lack a truly unified doctrine of faith and morals among themselves, contraception and baptism being the greatest example. Even if the Orthodox could come to a doctrinal consensus, the fact that they even had one day without uniformity in doctrine disproves their claims.

Scarcely anything the Catholic Church holds as infallible comes from a Pope. Look back to Acts 15. St. Peter declared the Judaizer heresy to be in error, and that following the Law of Moses is not needed to be a Christian. However, all the other truths of the faith were already pre-established by Israel, Christ and the Church. Papal Infallibility is behind Ecumenical Councils (bizarre how the Eastern Orthodox have not had any since their schism) and of course Ex Cathedra pronouncements, but most Catholic doctrines are infallible due to common and universal acceptance historically. The Holy Spirit guides the Church into all truth (John 16:13).

Here is an important takeaway: The Church is infallible. Papal Infallibility is a component of this, just like Sacred Scripture is a component of Sacred Tradition.

Infallible vs Authoritative

What many new Catholics will ask at this point is if we can ignore the Pope if we do not like what he is saying non-infallibly. The answer is: not usually. The Pope has the power to “bind conscience,” and all Bishops do as well, except the Pope is able to do this globally whereas Bishops can only bind the consciences of their flocks, within the bounds of canon law. Even if you disagree with the Pope’s prudential judgement on a matter, if he is not asking you to sin, you have to go along with it out of respect for the Office.

When I was in the Army I had to obey a few bad NCO’s and officers. They gave some orders I did not think were prudent, but they were not violations of Universal Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Actually, disobeying them would have been a violation of the UCMJ. I could not ignore them because I disagreed with their prudential judgement, I could only ignore them if they asked me to violate the UCMJ or a higher level order, which was, in my case, never.

The power to bind and loose was given first to St. Peter in Matthew 16 to signify his headship and authority over all the Apostles, and then to every Apostle in Matthew 18. This is why we can be bound, under pain of mortal sin, to attend Mass, but during something like a pandemic a Bishop can temporarily suspend the Sunday Obligation. It is also why different Catholic Rites have different fasting rules for Lent, and different liturgical calendars.

Where a Pope or Bishop can be disobeyed is if what they are requesting you to do violates a higher law. Essentially, what they are asking you to do must be a sin, and you have to know for sure that it is a sin. Therefore, if a Bishop asked you to rob a bank, you of course would not be bound to do so. If a Bishop says you must go to Mass on Sunday, or to a Saturday evening vigil Mass, then you must do so, because what he is asking you to do is no sin.

This stems from the Fourth Commandment: Honor your Father and your Mother. Not only are Bishops spiritual fathers, but obeying your parents unless they ask you to sin is like obeying God Himself, because He placed them in authority over you. Similarly, honoring them is a way of honoring God. Likewise, God placed Bishops and the Pope over you, and therefore obeying and honoring them is like obeying and honoring God. Obeying an unjust Pope or Bishop who asks you to do something that is no sin, but is unfair, can win you crowns in heaven, as St. Padre Pio attests. As St. Padre Pio said, “Without obedience there is no virtue.”

St. Padre Pio was once unjustly persecuted by his own Bishops, who misunderstood the miracles that occurred in his life, and mistrusted them. But he would never disobey them, as long as they did not ask him to sin.

The doctrine of Papal and Church Authority has been a massive blessing to the Church, despite it being misused a few times as the case of St. Padre Pio shows us. This is seen when it comes to the topic of polygamy. This is something Protestants often struggle with, as the Bible does not explicitly ban the practice. Martin Luther confessed as much, and blessed Prince Phillip of Hesse’s polygamist marriages thanks to the heresy of Sola Scriptura. He did not favor the legalization of polygamy, but he opened the door to it being allowed if the government simply allowed it, as he rejected an overarching Papal and Church authority.

The Catholic Church has banned polygamy authoritatively. It might not be an intrinsic evil or explicitly banned by the Bible, but the Church since the earliest time has been guided by the Holy Spirit to ban polygamy, and it would be a sin to practice it because it would be disobedience to the Church, and thus Christ Himself, as the Bride and Bridegroom are one. Polygamy is an affront to human dignity and out of alignment with God’s original plan for man and woman. Similarly, the Catholic Church has authoritatively banned slavery, despite the New Testament never banning it. We have the living Christ guiding the Bride, and someone who believes in Sola Scriptura will only be able to make a circumstantial case for banning slavery. One which many Southern protestant churches during the Civil War would have used Sola Scriptura to deny.

The Ordinary and Universal Magisterium

As I mentioned earlier, the vast majority of Church teaching does not come from an infallible Papal pronouncement. It comes directly from Christ, the Apostles and the Magisterium, which includes Ecumenical Councils (which the Eastern Orthodox have had none of since 1054 AD, although I would argue they did participate in and agree to the Council of Florence and reneged on it due to an Ottoman-appointed Patriarch in Constantinople). As Moline and Belmonte mention in their book, as Wikipedia summarizes, “The ordinary and universal magisterium is considered infallible when it proposes a doctrine that the pope and the bishops dispersed throughout the world who are in communion with the successor of St. Peter universally hold as definitive.”

If the Bishops universally hold something as definitive, the Holy Spirit, who guides the Church into all truth, has clearly conveyed it. If the entire Church is teaching something as doctrinally true, even without a Papal pronouncement or Ecumenical Council, it is doctrine. We do not need an infallible Papal pronouncement or Ecumenical Council to tell us that Christ rose again on the third day after His crucifixion for example. That said, if this doctrine is challenged, then a Pope or Ecumenical Council could respond to it with an infallible statement.

A good example of this is the Assumption of Mary, or what is known in the Eastern Church as the “Dormition of Mary.” This is the belief that the Blessed Mother was taken, body and soul, into heaven at the end of her days. This was an unchallenged belief for centuries among the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. However, it started to become challenged. Therefore, in 1950, Pope Pius XII published an encyclical called Munificentissimus Deus with what he declared to be an infallible pronouncement declaring that the doctrine of the Assumption is true and no one is allowed to remain a Catholic and deny it. As Pope Pius XII wrote, “Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.”

Not only is Scripture the Word of God, but the doctrine of the Church is the Word of God. This is necessarily true, as Christ and the Bride are one flesh, as aforementioned. There can be no doctrinal division within Christ, as there cannot be multiple equal truths. If the Church declares something to be infallible, Christ has declared it so. Thus, through Pope Pius XII, Christ declared that the Assumption of Mary is a fact, and we are bound to believe it to remain in the true faith, just as we are bound to believe that Christ suffered for our sins.

Proof from an Ecumenical Council

At the Third Council of Constantinople from 680-681 AD, we have a perfect intersection of Papal infallibility and an infallible Ecumenical Council. This Council addressed the heresy of Monothelitism, which taught that Christ had only one will (divine), rather than two wills (divine and human). The council condemned Monothelitism, and upheld the orthodox doctrine of Dyotheletism.

The Council was called by Emperor Constantine IV, and legates from the Vatican attended in Pope St. Agatho’s stead, with an important letter of his in hand. St. Agatho is both a Catholic and Eastern Orthodox saint.

Pope St. Agatho’s letter played the central role in resolving the heresy. It was directly addressed to the Byzantine Emperor and affirmed that Rome had always preserved the true faith, free from all error, as it was founded by St. Peter and inherited his Keys, and could not be overcome. This letter was read aloud at the Council as well. It read in part:

“This is the rule of the true faith, which this Spiritual Mother of your most tranquil empire, the Apostolic Church of Christ, has both held and preached without deviation.” - Pope St. Agatho

The Council accepted Pope St. Agatho’s letter as an authoritative articulation of perfect orthodox Christology, and recognized the Holy See’s divine role in preserving purity of doctrine.

Proof from St. Maximus the Confessor

St. Maximus the Confessor was both a Church Father and a Greek monk. He was a key figure in the ongoing Monothelite controversy which would be officially resolved by Third Constantinople 19 years after his martyrdom. For agreeing with Rome against former Patriarch Pyrrhus of Constantinople, he had his tongue cut out and his right hand cut off, so that he could no longer speak or write the truth. He died shortly thereafter in exile.

St. Maximus affirmed that Rome had a special role in preserving the Church’s doctrinal purity. He wrote:

“The See of Rome, according to the decrees of the councils and the holy canons, has received universally and without doubt the dominion, authority and power to bind and to loose over all the holy Churches of God that in are in the whole world,” (Letter to Peter, a Presbyter of Rome). St Maximus upheld Rome’s universal jurisdiction in matters of faith and morals, as what would become the Greek Orthodox Church had become corrupted with Monothelitism.

St. Maximus also wrote to Marinus of Cyprus. “All who in every way truly and piously confess the Lord in accordance with the teaching of the Apostolic See will be found with St. Peter.” St. Maximus believed that Rome was indeed the touchstone of orthodoxy. He was also considered a “Popesplainer” in his day for interpreting Pope Honorius’ ambiguous statements as intending to preserve peace as opposed to officially promulgating heresy. He underscored that Papal infallibility only applied to Ex Cathedra statements and not all Papal actions.

Patriarch Pyrrhus was excommunicated by Pope Theodore I in 649 AD, but the Church in Constantinople, and the Byzantine State, refused to entirely refute him and oppressed St. Maximus the Confessor instead. Patriarch Pyrrhus temporarily renounced Monothelitism after meeting with St. Maximus in Carthage, but under pressure from a crooked ruler, Emperor Constans II, he caved similar to the Ottoman puppet Patriarch Gennadius II of Constantinople, following the Council of Florence roughly 800 years later. Pope Theodore I then issued a second excommunication against Patriarch Pyrrhus.

St. Maximus the Confessor argued that anyone who aligned themselves with Patriarch Pyrrhus automatically excommunicated themselves, simply based on the fact that they disagreed with Rome. As St. Maximus said in his Disputations with Patriarch Pyrrhus:

If the Roman see recognizes Pyrrhus to be not only a reprobate but a heretic, it is certainly plain that everyone who anathematizes those who have rejected Pyrrhus, anathematizes the see of Rome that is, he anathematizes the Catholic Church. I need hardly add that he excommunicates himself also, if indeed he be in communion with the Roman see and the Church of God.... It is not right that one who has been condemned and cast out by the Apostolic see of the city of Rome for his wrong opinions should be named with any kind of honour, until he be received by her, having returned to her — nay, to our Lord — by a pious confession and orthodox faith, by which he can receive holiness and the title of holy.... Let him hasten before all things to satisfy the Roman see, for if it is satisfied all will agree in calling him pious and Orthodox.

One last quote from Church Father St. Maximus the Confessor: “The Church of the Romans has never erred, nor will it ever, because of the Lord’s promise to St. Peter. This is the Apostolic and Holy See, the foundation stone of the Church, always preserving the Orthodox faith and teaching all other Churches” (Opuscula Theologica et Polemica).

Conclusion

Scripture is materially sufficient to derive doctrinal truth, but it is not formally sufficient. As Trent Horn once put it, material sufficiency is like having all the materials needed to build a house, but formal sufficiency is like having a house entirely built, and ready to move into. Protestants insist that Scripture is formally sufficient, but they cannot agree on what the house looks like, or even where the front door is, as some accept baptismal regeneration while others reject it. We can derive from Scripture support for the Assumption of Mary, but it’s not explicitly in Scripture, just as the Trinity is not explicit in Scripture. Nevertheless, the Spirit guided the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium for centuries into teaching that the Assumption is true, and when the belief was questioned it was cemented as dogma by an infallible Papal pronouncement.

What Pope Pius XII did was a necessity for Church unity. We must be of one mind, one doctrine. There can be no division within Christ. Those who reject the Papacy embrace confusion, division and cannot be sure they are not believing error. When one rejects the papacy, they tend to devolve further and further from the truth, perhaps as a judgement from the Lord. For example, no Church ever allowed divorce, until a few decades after the Great Schism in 1054, when the Greek Orthodox, pressured by the rulers of Byzantium, began to contradict Christ and the Church Fathers by allowing divorce. This likely has caused many to lose out on eternal life in the Eastern Churches. Additionally, many Eastern Orthodox authorities have started to allow condom use as of the 1980’s. Contraception is a mortal sin, and now many Eastern Orthodox believers have been granted an illicit and invalid greenlight by their clergy to practice contraception.

Protestantism’s example is self-evident. From Martin Luther allowing polygamy in the earliest days of the reformation for a certain German prince, to the Anglicans “legalizing” contraception in 1930, becoming the first Christian church to allow it. Now millions are practicing this mortal sin among the Protestants. One can argue that millions of professing Catholics practice it too, and that may be true, but at least their Church doctrine is not leading them into this sin. It is unlikely that they can be saved unless they repent of this mortal sin, as they especially should know better. There is always chaff among the wheat.

Without a Pope, there is continual disunity and continuous doctrinal-level devolution on Christian teaching.

Key Takeaways

The key conditions for a papal statement to be infallible:

Ex Cathedra (From the Chair of St. Peter)

• The Pope must be speaking as the universal pastor and teacher of all Christians

  • Thus, any personal opinions, casual remarks, homilies and even most writings, including the vast majority of Papal Encyclicals, are not infallible.

Faith and Morals

• The teaching must pertain to faith or mortals, not science, politics or non-doctrinal topics.

Definitive Declaration

• The Pope must explicitly state that the doctrine is binding for all Catholics.

Universality

• The teaching must be aimed at the entire Church, not simply a particular group or region.

Most infallible statements come from Ecumenical Councils and the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium. Hardly any come directly from the Papacy.

Papal infallibility is an absolute must-have for Church unity. It is impossible without it.

Christ and the Bride are one, thus we should never be frightened by what the Pope or an Ecumenical might decide. Anything the Church definitively declares as true is the Word of God, as if Christ Himself declared it.

The Holy Spirit guides the Church into all truth. Faith in the Church is faith in Christ. To the degree that one disagrees with the Catholic Church on any given matter is the degree to which they personally disagree with the Lord Jesus.

Bishops have authority to bind one’s conscience and must be obeyed as long as they do not ask you to sin, or do something which violates Canon Law, as Canon Law is broadly binding on an entire autocephalous Church. Therefore, we cannot ignore the Pope or a Bishop on a matter just because their statement is fallible. It would be akin to disobeying one’s parents, or an Apostle, as God placed them in a position of authority Himself.

Third Constantinople was guided into the truth by Pope St. Agatho’s letter, as the Council recognized Rome’s special role in keeping doctrine pure.

St. Maximus the Confessor argued that one automatically excommunicated themselves from the Church, and thus the Christian religion, for agreeing with someone excommunicated by Rome. And the person who was excommunicated was a Greek Patriarch.

Let’s end with a quote from a 4th Century Church Father, St. Ambrose.