We teach and define that it is a dogma Divinely revealed that the Roman pontiff when he speaks ex cathedra, that is when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the Divine assistance promised to him in Blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals, and that therefore such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves and not from the consent of the Church irreformable.
So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.
The aforesaid dogmatic constitution then goes on in chapter 4 to define the conditions for papal infallibility:
* we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that o when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, + that is, when, 1. in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, 2. in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, 3. he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church, o he possesses, + by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, o that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. o Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable. So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.
In other words the conditions for infallibility are:
1)The Roman Pontiff (Pope) must invoke it
2)Speak Ex Cathedra (as defined in Pastor Aeternus above)
3)He MUST give a definition (i.e. He must define)
4)The doctrine defined must concern faith or morals
5)Must be intended to be binding upon the whole Church
An Ecumenical council may exercise infallibility only through the Pope's infallibility and never separate from him. Only the pope's promulgation of an ecumenical council can give the charism of infallibility as defined in Vatican I. Also, It is VERY, VERY important to note that in order for a teaching of the Pope or an Ecumenical Council to be considered infallible, it must make it explicit that the teaching is to be considered infallible, definitive, and binding upon the church. There is not any exact phrasing prescribed to do this, but it is usually indicated by one or sometimes both of the following phrases: (1) a formula indicating that this teaching is definitive (such as "We declare, decree and define..."), or (2) an anathema stating that anyone who deliberately dissents is outside the Catholic Church.
The Church may also contradict a previous teaching of the church, as long as the teaching was not taught infallibly. If this happens the infallible teaching voids the fallible one.
The charism of infallibility is used rather rarely. It may be invoked by the pope alone, but it is often exercised by the pope in conjunction with the college of Bishops when meeting in Ecumenical Councils. (According to Vatican I, Ecumenical councils are only infallible when the pope is in agreement with the decrees). Vatican II is a bit peculiar because it does not make the explicit dogmatic definitions which are required for infallibility according to Vatican I. Thus there is often a lot of debate whether or not certain teachings of Vatican II are infallible or merely pastoral recommendations. (The arguments for this are quite strong). This is exacerbated by the fact that Pope Paul VI who stated at the close of Vatican II that "The magisterium of the Church did not wish to pronounce itself under the form of extraordinary dogmatic pronouncements..." suggesting that the Pope did not state and did not intend to use his infallible charism when promulgating the decrees of the Second Vatican Council
Papal infallibility, since Vatican I, has only been used once. It was by Pius XII in Munificentissimus Deus, 1950, to define the Bodily Assumption of Mary into Heaven. Other papal teachings which meet Vatican I's criteria of infallibility preceding Vatican I but post 16th century include:
1)Cum occasione, Pope Innocent X, 1653 (condemning some of the Reformer Jansen's teachings.
2)Auctorem fidei, Pope Pius VI, 1794 (Also condemning Jansenists.
3)Ineffabilis Deus, Pope Pius IX, 1854, defining the immaculate conception
Oh, but there is so much more to Vatican I than what you have quoted. Like this, which is so seldom referred to:
“1. We teach and declare that,
* according to the gospel evidence,
* a primacy of jurisdiction over the whole church of God
* was immediately and directly
o promised to the blessed apostle Peter and
o conferred on him by Christ the lord.
[PROMISED]
2. It was to Simon alone,
* to whom he had already said
o You shall be called Cephas [42] ,
that the Lord,
* after his confession, You are the Christ, the son of the living God,
spoke these words:
* Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
* And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the underworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven [43] .
[CONFERRED]
3. And it was to Peter alone that Jesus,
* after his resurrection,
confided the jurisdiction of supreme pastor and ruler of his whole fold, saying:
* Feed my lambs, feed my sheep [44] .
4. To this absolutely manifest teaching of the sacred scriptures, as it has always been understood by the catholic church, are clearly opposed the distorted opinions of those who misrepresent the form of government which Christ the lord established in his church and deny that Peter, in preference to the rest of the apostles, taken singly or collectively, was endowed by Christ with a true and proper primacy of jurisdiction.
5. The same may be said of those who assert that this primacy was not conferred immediately and directly on blessed Peter himself, but rather on the church, and that it was through the church that it was transmitted to him in his capacity as her minister.
6. Therefore,
* if anyone says that
o blessed Peter the apostle was not appointed by Christ the lord as prince of all the apostles and visible head of the whole church militant; or that
o it was a primacy of honour only and not one of true and proper jurisdiction that he directly and immediately received from our lord Jesus Christ himself:
let him be anathema.
Chapter 2. On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs
1. That which our lord Jesus Christ, the prince of shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed apostle Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the church, must of necessity remain for ever, by Christ’s authority, in the church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time [45] .
2. For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the catholic church, received the keys of the kingdom from our lord Jesus Christ, the saviour and redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the holy Roman see, which he founded and consecrated with his blood [46] .
3. Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the church which he once received [47] .
4. For this reason it has always been necessary for every church—that is to say the faithful throughout the world—to be in agreement with the Roman church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body [48] .
5. Therefore,
* if anyone says that
o it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole church; or that
o the Roman pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy:
let him be anathema.
Chapter 3. On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman pontiff
1. And so,
* supported by the clear witness of holy scripture, and
* adhering to the manifest and explicit decrees both of our predecessors
o the Roman pontiffs and of
o general councils,
* we promulgate anew the definition of the ecumenical council of Florence [49] ,
* which must be believed by all faithful Christians, namely that
o the apostolic see and the Roman pontiff hold a world-wide primacy, and that
o the Roman pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter,
+ the prince of the apostles,
+ true vicar of Christ,
+ head of the whole church and
+ father and teacher of all christian people.
o To him, in blessed Peter, full power has been given by our lord Jesus Christ to
+ tend,
+ rule and govern
+ the universal church.
All this is to be found in the acts of the ecumenical councils and the sacred canons.
2. Wherefore we teach and declare that,
* by divine ordinance,
* the Roman church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other church, and that
* this jurisdictional power of the Roman pontiff is both
o episcopal and
o immediate.
* Both clergy and faithful,
o of whatever rite and dignity,
o both singly and collectively,
* are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this
o not only in matters concerning faith and morals,
o but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the church throughout the world.
3. In this way, by unity with the Roman pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the church of Christ becomes one flock under one supreme shepherd [50] .
4. This is the teaching of the catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation.
5. This power of the supreme pontiff by no means detracts from that ordinary and immediate power of episcopal jurisdiction, by which bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the apostles by appointment of the holy Spirit, tend and govern individually the particular flocks which have been assigned to them. On the contrary, this power of theirs is asserted, supported and defended by the supreme and universal pastor; for St Gregory the Great says: “My honour is the honour of the whole church. My honour is the steadfast strength of my brethren. Then do I receive true honour, when it is denied to none of those to whom honour is due.” [51]
6. Furthermore, it follows from that supreme power which the Roman pontiff has in governing the whole church, that he has the right, in the performance of this office of his, to communicate freely with the pastors and flocks of the entire church, so that they may be taught and guided by him in the way of salvation.
7. And therefore we condemn and reject the opinions of those who hold that
* this communication of the supreme head with pastors and flocks may be lawfully obstructed; or that
* it should be dependent on the civil power, which leads them to maintain that what is determined by the apostolic see or by its authority concerning the government of the church, has no force or effect unless it is confirmed by the agreement of the civil authority.
8. Since the Roman pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole church, we likewise teach and declare that
* he is the supreme judge of the faithful [52] , and that
* in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment [53] .
* The sentence of the apostolic see (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone,
* nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon [54] . And so
* they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman pontiff.
9. So, then,
* if anyone says that
o the Roman pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and
+ not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole church, and this
+ not only in matters of
# faith and morals, but also in those which concern the
# discipline and government of the church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that
o he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that
o this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful:
let him be anathema.”
No limitations there, are there!
Ok, imagine that Rome announces that it has declared that doctrine as optional, think filioque, in order to reunite with the Orthodox Christian Church. What do you do?
Thanks old republic:)