Is Papal Infallibility Falsifiable In Theory?

[Subcontrary]

Such a thing has never happened and is not likely to happen, but given the circumstances of your hypothetical, the answer is this: the statement, oral or written, would simply be false. The pope, though claiming to be speaking infallibly, would obviously not be, because he would be contradicting a doctrine. The Church would immediately know that the Pope, though claiming to be speaking infallibly, would not be.

I think you might be arguing that if a pope says something false, and says that that is infallible, it is still false. I know it would be false, but MattofTexas said

the Holy Spirit would prevent such a situation from ever occurring.

You say it is unlikely that it would occur, so do you mean that the Holy Spirit does not constrain the popes’ free will to claim they are speaking infallibly when they are not? Obviously popes do not have the freedom to decide what doctrine is true or false, but MattofTexas said that the Holy Spirit would prevent the situation from ever occurring where a pope uses the infallible-style language to claim a falsehood is true or vice versa. It sounds like you’re saying that this is not necessarily true: that the Holy Spirit does not constrain the free will of the popes to claim they are speaking infallibly when they aren’t, but only constrains their free will to actually make the claim a different truth value by saying they said so infallibly, which is clear.

 

[dshix]

I think you might be arguing that if a pope says something false, and says that that is infallible, it is still false. I know it would be false, but MattofTexas said

You say it is unlikely that it would occur, so do you mean that the Holy Spirit does not constrain the popes’ free will to claim they are speaking infallibly when they are not? Obviously popes do not have the freedom to decide what doctrine is true or false, but MattofTexas said that the Holy Spirit would prevent the situation from ever occurring where a pope uses the infallible-style language to claim a falsehood is true or vice versa. It sounds like you’re saying that this is not necessarily true: that the Holy Spirit does not constrain the free will of the popes to claim they are speaking infallibly when they aren’t, but only constrains their free will to actually make the claim a different truth value by saying they said so infallibly, which is clear.

The reason we say that the Holy Spirit would not allow such a thing to occur is not because the Holy Spirit would restrain the pope’s free will, but rather that the Holy Spirit would never permit such a person to become pope in the first place.

 

[Linux]

“I, Pope X, in the exercise of my office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of my supreme apostolic authority, define the doctrine to be held by the whole Church that the doctrine of papal infallibility is false.”

:stretcher:

This is an impossible situation, since he would have to have papal infallibility to make an infallible claim; and if he truly has papal infallibility he would be contradicting that fact by claiming that he does not; in which case it would be a fallible statement by default and not binding. The Pope cannot possibly deny his infallibility.

 

[Linux]

The reason we say that the Holy Spirit would not allow such a thing to occur is not because the Holy Spirit would restrain the pope’s free will, but rather that the Holy Spirit would never permit such a person to become pope in the first place.

Is this an actual doctrine of the church?

 

[Paddy_Walker]

Is this an actual doctrine of the church?

in Johns Gospel the Advocate is sent to the Apostles to teach, guide, etc. so I suppose it is a doctrine that the teaching and leading authority of the church is protected.

 

[JanetF]

The reason we say that the Holy Spirit would not allow such a thing to occur is not because the Holy Spirit would restrain the pope’s free will, but rather that the Holy Spirit would never permit such a person to become pope in the first place.

Bingo. The HS was sent to the apostles to help them teach etc.

 

[tdgesq]

Is this an actual doctrine of the church?

No, because the manner in which the Pope is protected by the Holy Spirit from teaching error has not been revealed to us. The fact that he is protected from teaching error is doctrine:

1. For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles. First Vatican Council.

 

[dshix]

No, because the manner in which the Pope is protected by the Holy Spirit from teaching error has not been revealed to us. The fact that he is protected from teaching error is doctrine:

1. For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles. First Vatican Council.

Correct.

Linux, there is no doctrine concerning how the Holy Spirit would stop a Pope from teaching error because we do not know; such a thing will never happen.

 

[Regency]

That the church claims its infallibility, seeing that its doctrine contains a likely sufficient portion of arithmetic & logic, suffices to derive a contradiction i.e., the fallibility of the church.

This is in consequence of Gödel’s 2nd Incompleteness Theorem.

 

[Regency]

May I remind you that Satan is the shadow of the Spirit?

 

[AuditVocemMeam]

By the way, an infallible statement by a pope rarely happens. Most are unaware that there have been only two such declarations made since the doctrine of papal infallibility was defined, once in 1854 and another about a century later in 1950.

Actually every canonization is an exercise of papal infallibility (“we decree and define that Blessed N. is a Saint”). And one can make arguments for many papal statements being exercises of infallibility. The Assumption and Immaculate Conception are just the most obvious ones.

 

[Subcontrary]

The reason we say that the Holy Spirit would not allow such a thing to occur is not because the Holy Spirit would restrain the pope’s free will, but rather that the Holy Spirit would never permit such a person to become pope in the first place.

And it isn’t certain how the Holy Spirit does this? Let’s say they’re electing a new pope, and Cardinal X is in the running. If Cardinal X becomes pope, he will declare that Mary was conceived with original sin. If the Holy Spirit would not allow Cardinal X to become the pope, is it possible that the Holy Spirit constrains the voters’ free will so that they are only able to vote for a pope who would not do what Cardinal X would do if he were elected?

I can’t quite see, if the cardinals are free to vote for whomever they wish, and the elected person is free to claim a falsehood is infallible, what exactly the Holy Spirit isn’t permitting? it seems like somebody’s free will has got to be constrained somewhere down the line.

 

[tdgesq]

And it isn’t certain how the Holy Spirit does this?

Correct. The relationship between grace and freedom hasn’t been completely defined by the CC. There are a number of theological theories.

I can’t quite see, if the cardinals are free to vote for whomever they wish, and the elected person is free to claim a falsehood is infallible, what exactly the Holy Spirit isn’t permitting? it seems like somebody’s free will has got to be constrained somewhere down the line.

It is certainly logically possible that free will and the influence of the Holy Spirit can co-exist. It is possible that all Popes will freely ask the Holy Spirit for protection from error prior to declaring an infallible dogma. In fact, this seems rather likely.

 

[dshix]

And it isn’t certain how the Holy Spirit does this? Let’s say they’re electing a new pope, and Cardinal X is in the running. If Cardinal X becomes pope, he will declare that Mary was conceived with original sin. If the Holy Spirit would not allow Cardinal X to become the pope, is it possible that the Holy Spirit constrains the voters’ free will so that they are only able to vote for a pope who would not do what Cardinal X would do if he were elected?

I can’t quite see, if the cardinals are free to vote for whomever they wish, and the elected person is free to claim a falsehood is infallible, what exactly the Holy Spirit isn’t permitting? it seems like somebody’s free will has got to be constrained somewhere down the line.

You are trying to put God (the Holy Spirit) into a box. It just doesn’t work that way. The power of God to influence the affairs of the world and his gift of free will to all humans are NOT mutually exclusive.

 

[Paddy_Walker]

And it isn’t certain how the Holy Spirit does this? Let’s say they’re electing a new pope, and Cardinal X is in the running. If Cardinal X becomes pope, he will declare that Mary was conceived with original sin. If the Holy Spirit would not allow Cardinal X to become the pope, is it possible that the Holy Spirit constrains the voters’ free will so that they are only able to vote for a pope who would not do what Cardinal X would do if he were elected?

I can’t quite see, if the cardinals are free to vote for whomever they wish, and the elected person is free to claim a falsehood is infallible, what exactly the Holy Spirit isn’t permitting? it seems like somebody’s free will has got to be constrained somewhere down the line.

seen in its reality it is the cardinals and the pope who ask the Spirit for guidance and search for it. the Spirit presumably does what they ask and guides their hearts and minds. In your scenario it sounds like the pope and cardinals would not want guidance and would resist, which in reality is not the case.

 

[Subcontrary]

You are trying to put God (the Holy Spirit) into a box. It just doesn’t work that way. The power of God to influence the affairs of the world and his gift of free will to all humans are NOT mutually exclusive.

Please go on. Influencing affairs is one thing, but you said, “the Holy Spirit would never permit such a person to become pope in the first place.” What does the Holy Spirit do to simultaneously make 100% certain that no pope is ever elected who would declare it an infallible dogma that Mary was conceived with original sin, AND make 100% certain that all electors are free to elect such a pope if they wish? I hope you don’t blame me for not yet understanding how these can be mutually inclusive.

seen in its reality it is the cardinals and the pope who ask the Spirit for guidance and search for it. the Spirit presumably does what they ask and guides their hearts and minds. In your scenario it sounds like the pope and cardinals would not want guidance and would resist, which in reality is not the case.

Maybe it wouldn’t happen in reality, but in theory is it at least conceivable that a pope or a cardinal would elect someone or declare something without asking the Holy Spirit what to do? If not, then your answer to this thread’s title question is “no,” I imagine.

 

[dshix]

Please go on. Influencing affairs is one thing, but you said, “the Holy Spirit would never permit such a person to become pope in the first place.” What does the Holy Spirit do to simultaneously make 100% certain that no pope is ever elected who would declare it an infallible dogma that Mary was conceived with original sin, AND make 100% certain that all electors are free to elect such a pope if they wish? I hope you don’t blame me for not yet understanding how these can be mutually inclusive.

I told you what I know the Church teaches. I didn’t say I knew how God does things.

God works in mysterious ways, often in ways so mysterious we don’t even know how he works. He can cause things to happen in the world, soften or harden the hearts of men, or affect events profoundly without directly interfering with man’s gift of choice.

Maybe it wouldn’t happen in reality, but in theory is it at least conceivable that a pope or a cardinal would elect someone or declare something without asking the Holy Spirit what to do? If not, then your answer to this thread’s title question is “no,” I imagine.

This is the other issue; there is no “in theory” with God. God just is how He is, and there is no theoretical “other” possibility for what He does. So the answer is, effectively, no, it is not possible for such a thing to happen in theory because such theory cannot possibly (or theoretically ) exist.

 

[Subcontrary]

I told you what I know the Church teaches. I didn’t say I knew how God does things.

God works in mysterious ways, often in ways so mysterious we don’t even know how he works. He can cause things to happen in the world, soften or harden the hearts of men, or affect events profoundly without directly interfering with man’s gift of choice.

So, do you mean that you don’t know how these two facts are reconciled, just that they are reconciled?

1. The Holy Spirit makes 100% certain that no pope is ever elected who would declare it an infallible dogma that Mary was conceived with original sin.
2. The Holy Spirit makes 100% certain that all electors are free to elect such a pope if they wish.

Hopefully one day the how will be available to us, because it seems contradictory for now, at least to me.

This is the other issue; there is no “in theory” with God. God just is how He is, and there is no theoretical “other” possibility for what He does. So the answer is, effectively, no, it is not possible for such a thing to happen in theory because such theory cannot possibly (or theoretically ) exist.

Maybe there’s no ‘in theory’ with God, but I think my question, especially what you quoted, was more about things ‘in theory’ with popes. Maybe there is no ‘in theory’ with popes, either. Either way, your answer to the title question is a nice unequivocal ‘no,’ papal infallibility is not even falsifiable in theory, which is fair enough. Thank you.

 

[davidv]

So, do you mean that you don’t know how these two facts are reconciled, just that they are reconciled?

1. The Holy Spirit makes 100% certain that no pope is ever elected who would declare it an infallible dogma that Mary was conceived with original sin.
2. The Holy Spirit makes 100% certain that all electors are free to elect such a pope if they wish.

Hopefully one day the how will be available to us, because it seems contradictory for now, at least to me.

Maybe there’s no ‘in theory’ with God, but I think my question, especially what you quoted, was more about things ‘in theory’ with popes. Maybe there is no ‘in theory’ with popes, either. Either way, your answer to the title question is a nice unequivocal ‘no,’ papal infallibility is not even falsifiable in theory, which is fair enough. Thank you.

Given the assumption that papal infallibility is unfalsifiable, does this make it untrue?

 

[dshix]

Hopefully one day the how will be available to us, because it seems contradictory for now, at least to me.

Exactly! All the doctrines of the Church are already outlined, but only a few are defined dogmas, and over time more and more of our doctrines are revealed in greater detail through the infallible interpretation of the Church.

Eventually, I daresay we’ll know for sure.

Maybe there’s no ‘in theory’ with God, but I think my question, especially what you quoted, was more about things ‘in theory’ with popes. Maybe there is no ‘in theory’ with popes, either. Either way, your answer to the title question is a nice unequivocal ‘no,’ papal infallibility is not even falsifiable in theory, which is fair enough. Thank you.

I’m sorry I can’t give a more satisfactory answer, as I always try to be as clear as possible to answer a question. However, some questions are more difficult to answer, and some don’t have clear answers at all.

However, I’m not a moral theologian, so I’m sure someone more experienced could answer your question with greater clarity.