Papal Infallibility and anathema

If one does not accept papal infallibility, can they be part of the Catholic Church?

Does the church say if someone does not - let them be anathema, and what does this mean really?

I would really like to understand the context of your question. Is there a particular infallible teaching you have an issue with? Is your issue with papal authority in general?

I know lots of Catholics who struggle with one or more of the Church’s teachings, but I encourage them to work through it, and stay with the Church.

In general, the Catholic Church has specific teachings, and papal infallibility (given the appropriate conditions for which it applies) is one of those those teachings. Jesus gave the authority of “binding and loosing” to Peter and the other Apostles. So when the Church declares something to be true, and might use the phrase “let them be anathema”, the Church is using its authority to bind that teaching on its members.

Infallibility is a gift from Jesus. “He who hears you hears me” (Luke 10:16). (There are several other quotes too). The ability of the Church to declare what is true is important, otherwise, a Christian must choose between over 40,000 different denominations and figure out which “truths” are true. Jesus made this easy by giving authority to Peter and the Apostles, and having this authority be able to be handed down through and unbroken line of successors.

If they are baptized or received into the Church, they are Catholic whether they believe this or not. if you are asking if a non Catholic should be baptized or come into full communion with the Church if they do not believe the teachings of the Church, that is a different question.

Must a Catholic assent to all the teachings of the Church? Yes.
Is papal infallibility a teaching of the Church? Yes,

“Anathema” in older documents is analogous to excommunication in some contexts, or more generally a condemnation of their position in other contexts. So it’s hard to say without more information.

There’s so much confusion about what ‘infallibility’ does and does not mean, it would be reasonable to ask first “what do you understand 'papal infallibility to mean?” before answering the question. Often, the understanding is mistaken, and the reply is “oh – Catholics don’t believe that, either!” :wink:

The Vatican I dogma on papal infallibility declares:
Vatican I (Pastor Aeternus, Chap 4, #9, an infallible dogma) is the basis for understanding infallibility.
“9. Therefore, faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith, to the glory of God our saviour, for the exaltation of the Catholic religion and for the salvation of the Christian people, with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. 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.”
papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum20.htm

ANATHEMA. Solemn condemnation, of biblical origin, used by the Church to declare that some position or teaching contradicts Catholic faith and doctrine.
Modern Catholic Dictionary by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
therealpresence.org/cgi-bin/getdefinition.pl

For infallibility to be exercised the Pope must teach:
(a) ex cathedra (from the Chair of Peter), that is as Shepherd and Teacher of all Christians,
(b) speaking with Peter’s apostolic authority to the whole Church,
© defining a doctrine of faith and morals.

Therefore only dogmas or definitive doctrinal teachings are infallible, not arguments nor any other declarations outside of definitive statements.

With the 1997 update of the CCC, # 88 reads: “The Church’s Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes truths contained in divine Revelation or having a necessary connection with them, in a form obliging the Christian people to an irrevocable adherence of faith, or also when it proposes in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these.”

I think I understand what papal infallibility teaches. I think in 1302 Pope Boniface in Unam Sanctam proved papal infallibility is not true - or anyone not Catholic and submitting to the pope, is not saved.

Which is…? :hmmm:

I think in 1302 Pope Boniface in Unam Sanctam proved papal infallibility is not true - or anyone not Catholic and submitting to the pope, is not saved.

LOL…! I just replied to that assertion in your other thread, where you brought it up first! :wink:

It is commonly believed that infallibility applies to every comment of every pope, which, as your post showed, is not true. Regarding something a pope declares Ex Cathedra, it is my understanding that this has happened only twice. There are, however, other teachings that are held to be infallible under different criteria. This is spelled out in Lumen Gentium #25.Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ’s doctrine infallibly whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on one position as definitively to be held.(40) This is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church, whose definitions must be adhered to with the submission of faith.(41*)

And this infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer willed His Church to be endowed in defining doctrine of faith and morals, extends as far as the deposit of Revelation extends, which must be religiously guarded and faithfully expounded. And this is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys in virtue of his office, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith,(166) by a definitive act he proclaims a doctrine of faith or morals.(42*) 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. To these definitions the assent of the Church can never be wanting, on account of the activity of that same Holy Spirit, by which the whole flock of Christ is preserved and progresses in unity of faith.(44*)
*The difficulty arises from the fact that there is no list of those doctrines the church has taught infallibly, so knowing what is held to be infallible and what is not is debatable. Usually this point is not clarified until a specific situation arises where the pope finds it necessary to resolve the issue. This is what happened when JPII wrote about the ordination of women. That women may not be ordained is infallible not because JPII proclaimed it but because the church has taught it infallibly.

Ender

This is the statement that is the hangup:

“That there is only One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church we are compelled by faith to believe and hold, and we firmly believe in her and sincerely confess her, outside of whom there is neither salvation nor remission of sins…Furthermore we declare, state and define that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of all human beings that they submit to the Roman Pontiff.”

POPE BONIFACE VIII Unam Sanctam (November 18, 1302 AD)

I read the context some, and get the gist of the times. But that last line is pretty strong, and excludes a lot of people. Am I missing something?

No, it does not exclude anyone. **All **are free to submit to the Pontiff.

And what does the church say today? This is from Lumen Gentium (#16)* Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.(19*) Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life. Whatever good or truth is found amongst them is looked upon by the Church as a preparation for the Gospel.(20*)
*This does not appear to be the same as what Pope Boniface said so what are the possible explanations? It seems that either the literal interpretation of his comments meaning that only Catholics will be saved is not accurate, and Lumen Gentium gives a more comprehensive explanation, or Boniface’s statement was his own opinion in which he was mistaken, and clearly it was not an infallible statement. In either case, infallibility is not an issue.

Ender

Markie Boy #9
Am I missing something?

You sure are.

“In *Unam Sanctam *(1302), Pope Boniface VIII was not addressing the world; nor was he even addressing the subject of non-Christians or non-Catholics. He was addressing European Catholics. “Every creature” means a bunch of Catholics in Europe. And it is necessary for salvation for Catholics to be subject to the Roman Pontiff. Otherwise, they have knowingly and deliberately exited the Catholic Church. Doing so is a mortal sin.

“Pope Boniface VIII valiantly sought to restore the role of the papacy in the Christian world. Unfortunately, the civil powers proved too great. He sought to bring peace to England and France by banning taxation of clergy to pay for wars. However, economic forces and French commerce forced him to back off. An exception was made in cases of national emergency and defence. He issued *UNAM SANCTAM *on November 18, 1302, emphasizing the superior status of his spiritual power over that of temporal rulers. King Philip IV rejected his claims. His councillor, the Colonna family, and various other enemies seized the Pope and abused him. Outraged citizens of Rome freed the Pope but shocked that such humiliation might be perpetrated against his person, the poor Pope died on October 12.”
From: Andrew Apologetic Ministries
apologetics.scriptmania.com/2900.htm

Take note of the reality:
“By Faith it is to be firmly held that outside the Apostolic Roman Church none can achieve salvation. This is the only ark of salvation. He who does not enter into it will perish in the flood. Nevertheless, equally certainly it is to be held that those who suffer from invincible ignorance of the true religion, are not for this reason guilty in the eyes of the Lord. Now, then, who could presume in himself an ability to set the boundaries of such ignorance, taking into consideration the natural differences of peoples, land, native talents, and so many other factors” (Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quidem, 1863 A.D.).[My emphasis].

This is just a clarification on the dogma that belonging to the Church is necessary for salvation. This just clarifies which Church–the one subject to the Roman Pontiff (being subject to the Roman Pontiff means belonging to the Church subject to him). That’s why earlier in the document the Pope discusses how Christ entrusted His flock to Peter–if you’re not in Peter’s flock, you’re not in Christ’s flock.

Baptism is the door by which one enters the Church. Even non-Catholic Christians, when they are baptized, are baptized into the Church (since we confess only one Baptism). We also acknowledge that those who are not baptized through no fault of there own, but with supernatural faith and charity have an explicit or implicit desire for baptism, receive the grace of Baptism and can belong to the Church.

Finally, it is obstinate heresy, schism, or apostasy that separates one from the Church–these are the “sins of separation.” But just being wrong is not heresy. Just being born and raised in a separated community is not schism. There needs to be a culpable act of the will or a guilty ignorance (e.g. simply not caring about divine truth or God’s will).

Finally, tying this to your initial question, denial of papal infallibility is heresy–but guilt (and therefore the effects of guilt) are dependent on the individuals will. “Let him be anathema” is just a formula to say that the preceding proposition is not the Gospel (it mimics St. Paul who said if someone brings a different Gospel, let him be anathema). For someone to be anathema is to treat them as an outcast, ie not belonging to the Church. But remember, while heresy does separate from the Church, just being wrong is not heresy.

Also, the definition of Boniface VIII is an example of an infallible definition, but it must be properly understood as the Church does. St. John Paul II affirmed it as one of three such definitions of this dogma (the other two were declared by ecumenical Councils):

[quote=St. John Paul II]4. Since Christ brings about salvation through his Mystical Body, which is the Church, the way of salvation is connected essentially with the Church. The axiom extra Ecclesiam nulla salus—“outside the Church there is no salvation”—stated by St. Cyprian (Epist. 73, 21; PL 1123 AB), belongs to the Christian tradition and was included in the Fourth Lateran Council (DS 802), in the Bull Unam sanctam of Boniface VIII (DS 870) and in the Council of Florence (Decretum pro jacobitis, DS 1351).
[/quote]

The whole thing is a good read on this dogma:
ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP950531.HTM

Any Christian baptized into Christ is in the Catholic Church because being baptized into Christ is a Catholic action and always has been. This explains why baptism from most other Protestant churches are valid in the eyes of the Church. There is no salvation outside THAT church because** yours is in it. **The phrase came up in the 13th century when there was only one Church. It’s a no brainer. The phrase had to be reformulated because it was outdated for it’s original purpose (to settle a controversy with European Catholics), **“No Salvation Outside the Church” has nothing to do with excluding. ** The degree of separation from the Catholic Church varies from one ecclesial community to the next, but if they are baptized and profess Christ, they are part of the Catholic Church whether they like it or not. CCC817-819

:thumbsup:

http://s5.postimg.org/p2cmjfeo7/39293_495423777171860_1847652215_n_jpg_width_427.jpg

and the fastest rate of growth in vocations

Modern Catholic DIctionary

ANATHEMA. Solemn condemnation, of biblical origin, used by the Church to declare that some position or teaching contradicts Catholic faith and doctrine.

“If anyone,” Paul wrote to the Galatians, “preach to you a gospel besides what you have received, let him be anathema” (Galatians 1:9). Reflecting the Church’s concern to preserve the integrity of faith, the Fathers anathematized heretics in a variety of terms. Polycarp called Marcion the firstborn of the devil. Ignatius saw in heretics poisonous plants, or animals in human form. Justin (c. 100-65) and Tertullian (160-220) called their teachings an inspiration of the Evil One. Theophilus compared them to barren and rocky islands on which ships were wrecked, and Origen said they were pirates placing lights on cliffs to lure and destroy vessels in search of refuge. These primitive views were later tempered in language, but the implicit attitudes remained and were crystallized in solemn conciliar decrees. The familiar anathema sit (let him be anathema, or excommunicated) appears to have been first applied to heretics at the Council of Elvira (Spain) in 300-6, and became the standard formula in all the general councils of the Church, as against Arius (256-336) at I Nicaea (325), Nestorius at Ephesus (431), Eutyches at Chalcedon (451) and the Iconoclasts at II Nicaea in 787. (Etym. Greek anathema, thing devoted to evil, curse; and accursed thing or person; from anatithenai, to set up, dedicate.)

From Vatican I:

“… we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman pontiff speaks ex cathedra, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed His Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. 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.”

Was pope Alexander viii infallible when he gave financial support to protestant William of orange to kill Catholics in Ireland

No pope is personally infallible. Infallibility applies to the Church in matters of faith and morals only, through the magisterium and office of Supreme Pontiff ex cathedra in communion with each other.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.