F
FlaviusGratian
Guest
I have a question on papal infallibility.
In theory I understand how it works, which says that if a pope speaks ex cathedra he is protected from all heresy when defining a dogma of faith and morals.
But what I don’t understand is how it works beyond that. Could a pope, theoretically, say something heretical? Like, could a pope walk up and say “protestants who reject Catholic dogma will be saved” or “Mary was not a virgin”? Even if he does not mean it, could he, theologically speaking, actually say it? Is he protected from all heresies even when not speaking ex cathedra? I guess what I am asking here is, can a pope be absolutely protected from even material heresy, which is heresy that is spoken but the speaker is not aware he is even going against Catholic dogma?
Or in another sense, can a two popes disagree on a non yet-declared dogma? Could one pope say “Mary is the co-redemptrix” and another say “Mary is not the co-redemptrix”?
In which case, it doesn’t seem like dogma is necessary because whatever a pope says would be protected from heresy anyways.
So, my questions are:
In theory I understand how it works, which says that if a pope speaks ex cathedra he is protected from all heresy when defining a dogma of faith and morals.
But what I don’t understand is how it works beyond that. Could a pope, theoretically, say something heretical? Like, could a pope walk up and say “protestants who reject Catholic dogma will be saved” or “Mary was not a virgin”? Even if he does not mean it, could he, theologically speaking, actually say it? Is he protected from all heresies even when not speaking ex cathedra? I guess what I am asking here is, can a pope be absolutely protected from even material heresy, which is heresy that is spoken but the speaker is not aware he is even going against Catholic dogma?
Or in another sense, can a two popes disagree on a non yet-declared dogma? Could one pope say “Mary is the co-redemptrix” and another say “Mary is not the co-redemptrix”?
In which case, it doesn’t seem like dogma is necessary because whatever a pope says would be protected from heresy anyways.
So, my questions are:
- Can a pope be a material heretic?
- Is everything a pope says, even if it hasn’t been declared dogma yet, protected from heresy? Is everything a pope says, even if it isn’t dogma, true?