The papal accusers are already preparing a sinful unfaithful response to the possible use of papal infallibility by Pope Francis. First, they cite the First Vatican Council (which they reject in many of its teachings).

“6. 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.” [Vatican I, Pastor Aeternus, chapter 4, n. 6.]

The purpose of the guidance of the Holy Spirit, promised by Christ to Peter and his successors [Mt 16:18-19; Lk 22:32], is to guard and expound the divine revelation of Tradition and Scripture (which is the deposit of faith). Certainly, this is a true statement.

However, the sinful interpretation being used by the opponents of Pope Francis is to claim that the Pope can be disregarded, contradicted, and openly resisted when he teaches or acts contrary to their own private interpretation of Tradition or Scripture. They think they can evaluate every decision of the Pope on doctrine and discipline, and oppose what they judge to be “some new doctrine”, what they judge to be contrary to divine revelation. This is heresy and schism.

The true meaning of the above quoted text is that the Holy Spirit prevents the Roman Pontiff from teaching some new doctrine, some false version of the gospel; the Spirit keeps the doctrine and discipline of every Pope in line with Tradition and Scripture. And so the Holy Spirit makes certain that papal teachings “faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.” To expound means to explain at length, including explanations that reveal truths not explicitly stated. Some truths of Tradition and Scripture are implicit, such as the Immaculate Conception or the Assumption. Also the Church uses many theological terms and expressions, not found in the Bible, but which are a way to expound revealed truths. This has been the constant practice of the Church since the time of Peter and the first Apostles.

Now let’s look at the full passage from Vatican I:

“5. The Roman pontiffs, too, as the circumstances of the time or the state of affairs suggested, sometimes by summoning ecumenical councils or consulting the opinion of the Churches scattered throughout the world, sometimes by special synods, sometimes by taking advantage of other useful means afforded by divine providence, defined as doctrines to be held those things which, by God’s help, they knew to be in keeping with Sacred Scripture and the apostolic traditions.

“6. 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.

“Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Savior to the prince of his disciples: I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren [Lk 22:32].

“7. This gift [Latin: charisma] of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this See so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole Church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell.“

Notice that the charism of truth and never-failing faith is “divinely-conferred” on Peter and every one of his successors. The Roman Pontiffs have no choice but to receive this gift. Of course, a person elected as Pope can decline the office. Or a Pope in office can resign. So this gift is not against the free will of the Pope. However, it is a gift of prevenient grace, which does not allow cooperation or refusal of cooperation. The Pope freely takes up his office, and he can freely lay it down. But while in office, the papal charisms secure the path of salvation of the faithful without fail. And therefore, this charism of truth and never-failing faith is one of the means that establishes the indefectibility of the Church, so that the gates of Hell can never prevail over the Church. No use of the free will of the Pope can cause the gates of Hell to prevail because the Holy Spirit guides and protects the teachings and decisions of Peter and his successors.

So when the papal accusers say that the Pope has free will, and therefore he can teach grave error, teach heresy, and lead the Church astray — even under papal infallibility — they are wrong. Vatican I presents the ancient constant teaching of the Church on the charism of truth and never-failing faith, which is the Church’s perennial interpretation of Luke 22:32. See the text above, beginning with “by God’s help”. The help of the Holy Spirit ensures that the teachings of the Pope, or of the Pope and body of Bishops, which meet the conditions for infallibility are actually true teachings from the deposit of faith. It cannot be otherwise.

Therefore, the accusers of Pope Francis are wrong to claim that any teaching of any Pope or Council, which they judge to be contrary to Tradition, cannot be infallible. To the contrary, when a papal teaching meets the conditions for papal infallibility, then the faithful can trust the contents of that teaching to be true, based on the promises of Christ and the dogmas and constant teaching of the Church.

As for teachings and decisions of discipline of any Pope or Council which are non-infallible, these cannot err gravely. For the charism of truth and never-failing faith applies to every exercise of the Keys of Peter. The non-infallible teachings and decisions of discipline are always protected from grave error, and the infallible teachings and dogmatic facts are always protected from all error.

See my article: The perennial teaching of the Church: No Pope can teach or commit heresy

See these teachings of Popes, Saints, Doctors, Fathers, and Ecumenical Councils: Perennial Catholic Teaching on the Roman Pontiff

IF Pope Francis uses Papal Infallibility

What will be the response of the papal accusers? They have already built up an heretical theology which allows them to claim that a teaching which meets the conditions for papal infallibility is not truly infallible and can be heresy, if the Pope has used his free will, his will that is supposedly contrary to the true Faith, to teach a new and false doctrine. But that is not how papal infallibility works.

Instead, whenever a teaching of the Pope meets the conditions for infallibility taught by Vatican I and reiterated by Vatican II, then the faithful can trust that the teaching is certainly true — without a need to judge the teaching and determine if it is a teaching of Tradition and Scripture. That last provision is NOT taught by Vatican I in the definition of infallibility. Teachings under Papal Infallibility are not ONLY infallible IF the faithful (or just the unfaithful opponents of the Pope) judge it to be true. Such a provision nullifies the very purpose of the charism of infallibility. Every teaching of any human person is true if it is examined and found to be true. The benefit of the infallibility of Papal Infallibility, of Conciliar Infallibility, and of the ordinary universal magisterium is that the faithful can trust the teaching without applying their own evaluation, which can err.

Infallibility has not been given to the conservative or traditionalist subculture, so that they alone can judge and approve of teachings from Popes, Councils, and the ordinary universal magisterium. But that is how they speak and act. They oppose every teaching and decision of Popes and Councils and of the body of Bishops, dispersed in the world, but teaching with the Pope, if it is contrary to their own judgment. It is as if they have transferred infallibility to their ideological subculture, away from the successors of Peter and the successors of the other Apostles. That is heresy and schism. Anathema sint.

Papal Infallibility, Vatican I:

1. “the Roman Pontiff”
2. “speaks ex cathedra” (“that is, when in the discharge of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority….”)
3. “he defines”
4. “that a doctrine concerning faith or morals”
5. “must be held by the whole Church” [Pastor Aeternus, chap. 4.]

When a teaching meets all five of the above criteria, it is infallible. Notice that NONE of the criteria require an evaluation that the teaching be judged to be true. It has to be on the subject of faith or morals. But the usefulness of infallibility is that a judgment by the faithful, who are all fallen sinners capable of grave error, does not enter into the required conditions. So no person or group in the Church can claim that a teaching of the Pope, meeting the above conditions, is nevertheless false because they judge it to be contrary to the deposit of faith. No such authority or role has ever been given by Christ or His Church to any subset of the faithful apart from the Pope or the Bishops as a body.

Notice what Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 25, says about Papal Infallibility:

“And therefore his definitions, of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church, are justly styled irreformable, since they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, promised to him in blessed Peter, and therefore they need no approval of others, nor do they allow an appeal to any other judgment. For then the Roman Pontiff is not pronouncing judgment as a private person, but as the supreme teacher of the universal Church, in whom the charism of infallibility of the Church itself is individually present, he is expounding or defending a doctrine of Catholic faith.(43*) The infallibility promised to the Church resides also in the body of Bishops, when that body exercises the supreme magisterium with the successor of Peter.”

Definitions of papal infallibility need no consent from the Church, nor from any subset of persons in the Church. They have the assistance of the Holy Spirit, promised by Christ to Peter and his successors. They require no approval of others, certainly not from a group of persons opposed to the Roman Pontiff. And there is no appeal to any other judgment. The accusers of Pope Francis cannot appeal to the few schismatic Bishops who take their side, nor to certain unfaithful priests and theologians, to judge that the definition under papal infallibility is contrary to divine revelation. No such authority or role is given to anyone. For the Roman Pontiff is NOT pronouncing judgment as a private person, but as the Supreme Teacher of the Church “in whom the charism of infallibility of the Church itself is individually present”. And therefore, the Pope need not consult with anyone, nor obtain their approval before teaching infallibly.

Ronald L Conte Jr