The Ethics of Papal Infallibility

Pulitzer Prize-winning author David Kertzer has recently published ThePope Who Would Be King: The Exile Of Pius IX And The Emergence Of Modern Europe. This is a thorough investigation into the Papacy of Pius IX. Ketzer goes into great detail examining many aspects of the private and public life of Pius IX, including his initial popularity amongst the Roman people, and then his eventual collapse into deep unpopularity because of his deep reactionary views. Ultimately, with the establishment of Italy as a nation, Pius IX had to give up his power as temporal (i.e., non-spiritual) ruler, and confined himself in the Vatican.

            Pius IX is controversial for all sorts of reasons: his publication of the Syllabus of errors defining as heresies basic modern institutions such as free speech, freedom of religion, etc.; his uneasy relationship with the Jews of Rome; his decision regarding the case of Edgardo Montara; his confrontations with Italian nationalists; his support for Austrian imperialism.

            But, above all, he is remembered for his role in defining the doctrine of Papal infallibility during the First Vatican Council in 1870. Long before Pius IX, some sectors of the Catholic Church sympathized with such a doctrine, and quoted from the Bible in support of it. In John 16:13 Jesus says that a Spirit will guide his disciples towards the Truth (there is no mention about Papal infallibility), and in Matthew 28:20, Jesus says that he will stay with his disciples until the end of time (again, no mention of infalible popes). Be that as it may, those passages have been used in support of papal infallibility for centuries.

            Prior to 1870, not all Catholics were convinced of this doctrine. To their credit, many Popes had seen the totalitarian danger of proclaiming a mere moral infallible in his decrees. Many theologians were concerned that the doctrine of infallibility could give Popes the power to derogate what previous Church councils had decreed.

            However, as Kertzer narrates it in his book, Pius IX was determined to impose his doctrine, and he used many immoral tactics to achieve his goal. Long before Kertzer’s book, another respected author, Father August Hasler, published a book documenting many of the questionable tactics employed by Pius IX (How the Pope Became Infallible).

            Pius IX made sure that during the Council, theological discussions would not be registered by writing, so that theologians would not have the proper time to think about it thoroughly. Pius IX also forbade Council members to get together in discussion sessions, and he also got rid of recess breaks between sessions. He did not even stop the Council during a malaria outbreak, and arrested one Armenian bishop that was vehemently opposed to the approval of the infallibility dogma.

            Finally, with all these morally questionable tactics, Pius IX prevailed, and in 1870, imposed one of the most totalitarian religious doctrines ever approved: if the Pope believes X, but someone else believes Y, then that person must renounce belief Y, and accept the belief promulgated by the Pope, no matter how absurd it may be.

            Some Catholic apologists try to sugarcoat this fact, by arguing that Papal infallibility does not apply to everything the Pope ever does, but rather, only applies to the time when the Pope speaks ex cathedra about doctrinal aspects of faith and morals. In the past, so the argument goes, there have been Popes that have been mistaken, yet that does not invalidate the doctrine of infallibility. For example, Honorius I taught the monothelitist heresy (i.e., Christ has only one will), but this does not go against Papal infallibility, because Honorius I did not teach this doctrine ex cathedra.

            This is true. But, historically, prior to 1870, it was not altogether clear when a Pope taught something informally, and when he taught it ex cathedra. By contrast, it is now clear when the Pope speaks ex cathedra. So far, the only time a Pope has clearly spoken ex cathedra (and therefore, has used Papal infallibility as a resource) was in 1950, when Pius XII proclaimed the dogma of the Assumption of Mary.

            Yet, despite this important caveat, the doctrine of Papal infallibility is morally very dangerous. Theoretically, ecclesiastical organization has no way of impeding a Pope from making wild allegations ex cathedra, and proclaiming them on the basis of Papal infallibility. Furthermore, the very notion of Papal infallibility implies the suppression of critical thinking, and the complete renunciation of autonomy when it comes to making judgments and decisions.

            In the coming years, if the Catholic Church truly wants to cleanse itself of its Medieval remnants, it must begin by reexamining the doctrine of Papal infallibility, and criticize it, not only for the way it was fraudulently imposed by Pius IX, but also for what it represents.

---