See B. Tierney, Origins of Papal Infallibility, 1150-1350 (1972).
In Roman Catholicism, the doctrine that the pope, acting as supreme teacher and under certain conditions, as when he speaks ex cathedra (“from the chair”), cannot err when he teaches in matters of faith or morals. It is based on the belief that the church, entrusted with the teaching mission of Jesus, will be guided by the Holy Spirit in remaining faithful to that teaching. The First Vatican Council (1869–70) stated the conditions under which a pope may be said to have spoken infallibly: he must intend to demand irrevocable assent from the entire church in some aspect of faith or morals. The doctrine remains a major obstacle to ecumenical endeavours and is the subject of controversy even among Roman Catholic theologians.
Learn more about papal infallibility with a free trial on Britannica.com.
Infallibility, from Latin origin ('in', not + 'fallere', to deceive), is a term with a variety of meanings related to knowing truth with certainty.
When a statement, teaching, or book is called 'infallible', this can mean any of the following:
When a person is called 'infallible', this can mean any of the following:
These definitions differ widely. In common speech, 'infallibility' can refer to a person (or a group of persons), to an act of teaching by these persons, or to the information being taught.
Furthermore, infallibility can refer to the 'absence of error' or to the 'inability to err'. Although these are similar, they are philosophically distinct categories. For example, it is theoretically possible for a person to live their entire life without ever uttering a false sentence, even though they had the ability to err.
Infallibility is sometimes used to refer to someone's ability to 'learn' something with certainty. For example, a careful researcher might study a hundred books, each of which contains a few errors, and after carefully judging the statements in these books might deduce the complete, error-free truth. This is referred to as 'learning infallibly' or 'knowing infallibly'. However, this meaning is rarely used.
Infallibility is inseparable from human nature as a result of the aspect of the human condition called self-awareness. It is one of the features that set us apart from animals, and as such, civilization cannot exist without it. In some cases, this may mean that a fact is to be accepted as true by all people; in others it may mean that an arbitrary decision must be made, and then not disputed.
Bank transactions are an example of this. If one cannot obtain certainty when counting out a withdrawal, then all transactions would become negotiated. "I think SIX twenties make a hundred. After all, you can't be certain it is only five, and the customer is always right."
Epistemology, a branch of philosophy, is concerned with the question of what, if anything, humans can know.
Some philosophical schools denying that people can know anything; others deny that people can know anything with certainty. For details, see existentialism and skepticism.
The German critical rationalist philosopher Hans Albert presented a logical argument that fallibilism is ubiquitous and inevitable, even in the fields of mathematics and logic. For details, see Münchhausen Trilemma.
Other philosophical schools agree that people can know things with certainty. See metaphysics, epistemology, reason and logic.
According to the First Vatican Council (1870-71) and as reaffirmed at Vatican II (1963-1965) the Pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra on matters of faith and morals.
Infallibility does not refer to the inability to sin (impeccability), or to the personal holiness of a person, although it is occasionally misunderstood in that sense.
An example of support of fallibility can be found in the Talmud, Pesachim 94b:
The words of the Mishna are commented on by numerous commentators, and evidence mounts that the Geonim and the Rambam perceived that the sages of the Talmud "erred in a matter of astronomy. The Rambam, himself, wrote that the great sages are not expected to advocate positions perfectly in-line with modern science because they were "scholars of that generation." often basing their assessments of what "they learned from the scholars of the era.