Replies

When you elevate a person, or even the pronouncement of a person to the point of "infallibility" then when they go off-script you are bound to endorse their views. History is replete with papal pronouncements that eviscerate the doctrine of infallibility. The problem won't go away by claiming nebulous rules to explain "limited meaning" to infallibility. It didn't start with this pope. The problem isn't outsiders' misunderstanding of the "limited meaning" of papal infallibility, the problem is the false dogma of infallibility itself, that has been discredited so many times by this pope and other popes.

papal infallibility means that the pope makes, or should make, no mistakes in matters concerning the doctrine of the Catholic Church. The Council even went so far as to state that “should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition [of papal infallibility—MP] of ours: let him be anathema [condemned—MP]” (“First Dogmatic...,” 1870, 4.9).

For more than a century, this dogma has plagued many Catholics who have worked feverishly to try to harmonize the nature of the “infallible” dogma with the declarations, teachings, and revelations of the popes who lived before and after its establishment. After all, it is claimed that the Catholic Church does not create new dogmas; rather, it proposes eternal truths already contained in the “deposit of faith” (see “Roman Catholic...,” 1892, 8:772; Dixon, 1852, p. 197). Therefore, it could be said that, before the 19th century, every pope has been subject to “infallibility” without knowing it.

unfortunately I think Protestants, especially those who don’t care for Roman Catholicism, have latched on to and give much more credence and faith to ‘papal infallibility’ than actual Catholics do. It is a convenient whip to use to attack, especially on an easily misunderstood doctrine.