Papal infallible statements - what are them?

[Vlad Zaytsev]

Hi,
Can anybody of Catholics help me?

Heard there were in total very few infallible statements given by all Popes beginning from St. Peter, there were only about 4 or 6 infallible statements for all 2000 years.
Does anybody know, is this right?
And is there any list of the infallible statements given?
In particular, is CCC formally infallible?

Thanks,
Vlad.

PS. And let me please give warm greetings to all members on this forum, I am new here.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Believe we must first distinguish between the magisterium, being the teaching Authority of the Church, and it having infallibility in teaching faith and morals, as opposed to the infallibility of individuals. The later is often the mistaken view taken by non-Catholics when we use the term. All Catholics sin including the Pope, so we do not view men as infallible, except for Jesus.

It is also useful to point out that infallible is not the same as Divine Inspiration or Revelation. Inspiration would be the Word of God. A Revelation is something not formerly known revealed by God. Infallible removes the possibility of error by the Guidance of the Holy Spirit, but it is still a human writing (not Inspired). It also deals with interpreting and keeping safe by the Grace of the same Spirit something already revealed (not new Revelation). These things were promised to the Church by Christ in His sending the Spirit to guide the Church here on earth.

The infallible teaching Authority specific to the Pope occurs only when he is said to speak ex cathedra (from the chair (of Peter)). Since the Bishops (of which the Pope is one) generally resolve most issues within the Church collectively in councils, the Pope has seldom needed to use his special Authority, that given to Peter and passed on to his successors. Depending on whom you talk to, Papal infallibility has only been used 2-4 times in 2000 years. Almost no one doubts the two pronouncements on Mary were ex cathedra pronouncements:

The Immaculate Conception (1854)
The Assumption (1950)

Basically those two together say Mary was conceived, then born without the stain of Original sin by God’s Grace. She then lived a sinless life by that same Grace and was assumed body and soul into Heaven rather than dying (Like Enoch and Elijah). Interesting in both cases this was something Catholics had apparently always believed and taught prior to the announcement. Also am told that these Popes first asked every Bishop for consent by formal letter, prior to making these pronouncements on Mary. Am not certain, but there must have been reason for issuing these when they did, like maybe a growing number of questions about Mary or dissension by some vocal group regarding these teachings, either within or outside the Church. Just as in the case of our Canon for the Bible, even though the list had not changed for thousands of years, the Church did not feel the need to declare it closed until the list of books came under attack in the Reformation. So the Pope in these two cases is declaring something about Mary to defend the truth not reveal anything new about her. Most likely this was done against people claiming something very different about Mary. So these were traditions already believed by the faithful, that by these decree become Tradition.

Apparently some Catholic theologians would include one or two more:

Pope Boniface VIII statement Unam Sanctam (1302 ) (–Papal Authority and necessity of the Church for salvation.)

2. St Leo's letter to Flavian which was examined and approved by the Council of Chalcedon in 451 – (Incarnation.)

Also some would claim every declaration of a Saint is an Infallible decree by the Pope. Personally see some difficulty seeing these decrees by Popes in the same light as the first two. Seems much confusion comes when people start looking at every statement made by Pope’s and asking whether each were infallible or not. I do not think that was ever the idea of Papal Infallibilty, that every statement needed examining. Since the teaching authority of the Church, the Magisterium is infallible as it pertains to faith and morals, to me it is difficult to distinguish and perhaps the reason we do not have a list of ex cathedra teachings, as any such decrees a Pope makes is by definition then part of the magisterium. So it is not like we need a special list for the Papal magisterium. We are to accept all of the Magisterium as infallible in regards to teaching faith and morals.

To see why people limit these decrees to only 2-4 over the last 2000 years, it might be useful to see how the Church defines what is or is an infallible decree by the Pope from Vatican council(council ended 1870). This is how the Bishops defined ex cathedra according to the Catholic Online Encyclopedia (copied from New Advent site)

• • The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians, not merely in his private capacity as a theologian, preacher ar allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. It must be clear that he speaks as spiritual head of the Church universal.
  • Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible (see below, IV).
  • Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense (see DEFINITION). These are well-recognized formulas by means of which the defining intention may be manifested.
  • Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church. To demand internal assent from all the faithful to his teaching under pain of incurring spiritual shipwreck (naufragium fidei) according to the expression used by Pius IX in defining the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin. Theoretically, this intention might be made sufficiently clear in a papal decision which is addressed only to a particular Church; but in present day conditions, when it is so easy to communicate with the most distant parts of the earth and to secure a literally universal promulgation of papal acts, the presumption is that unless the pope formally addresses the whole Church in the recognized official way, he does not intend his doctrinal teaching to be held by all the faithful as ex cathedra and infallible.

For more see Catholic Encyclopedia online (copied the above from this ariticle) http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm#IIIB


If that is an accurate definition, then I can see why people would limit such decrees to the first two I mentioned. Hope that helps.

 

[Vlad Zaytsev]

Dear DrBubbaLove,

thank you very much for very clear explanation.

And thank you very much for explanation about magisterium infallibility as well.

Vlad.

 

[DrBubbaLove]

Overlooked this one quote"In particular, is CCC formally infallible?"

Would have to say yes, the CCC represents infallibly a complete statement of everything we as Catholics are to believe in faith. The problem is that it is not an easy read and easily mis-understood/misquoted.

 

[Vlad Zaytsev]

"In particular, is CCC formally infallible?"
Would have to say yes, the CCC represents infallibly a complete statement of everything we as Catholics are to believe in faith.

Yes, after your first answer I made the same conclusion on the basis the Cathehism is a part of Magisterium. Thus it is infallible (although not papal infallible by definition of papal infallibility - thank you very much for the note that the papal infallibility is only a part of the church infallibility).

The problem is that it is not an easy read and easily mis-understood/misquoted.

This is the common problem. There are very few things in the world that can be explained and understood unambigously (Goedel theoreme proves this) and a very minor subset of these things that could be understood easily.
Also there is always may be somebody who will misinterpret/misquote any text by mistake or deliberately. That's life.

So, I believe it is a part of our mission as Christians (is it not too ambitious? ) to give to us and other people the explanations of Christianity, that are easy to understand, and even, in some cases, may be not necessary infallible in general, they only have to be proper for the current situation and compliant to Gospel and Church teachng.

Thanks again,
Vlad.

 

[Vlad Zaytsev]

Sorry, posted the above message twice; removed the second copy.