# Papal infallibilitie

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibilitie/26414>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [July 22, 2000, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibilitie/26414 "2000-07-22T01:03:35Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\
**Post date:** [July 25, 2000, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibilitie/26414/21 "2000-07-25T14:06:27Z")

</div>

There are many Catholics who think that infallibility was a mistake. There’s a new book by Garry Wills (my favorite political writer), who’s a devout Catholic, which criticizes infallibility and several other Catholic doctrines. The book is call _Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit_, and chapter 16 is a good explanation of how the doctrine of infallibility came about.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bibliophage](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bibliophage/32/7615_2.png) [@bibliophage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bibliophage)\
**Post date:** [July 25, 2000, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibilitie/26414/22 "2000-07-25T16:32:03Z")

</div>

Murray Gell-Mann infallible? _Au contraire_!

> [@](#):
>
> On a camping trip in Mexico years ago, Zachariasen recalls, Gell-Mann decided to check his car’s oil; he asked to borrow a dipstick. Told his car had its own dipstick, Gell-Mann went off to have a look. He decided to add some oil. Moments later, Zachariasen discovered that Gell-Mann had removed the car’s air filter and was about to pour a quart of oil straight into the carburetor – something most drivers know would ruin the engine. He was stopped in the nick of time.  
> “He doesn’t like to admit his ignorance,” Zachariasen explains. Gell-Mann is quite convinced that he knows everything, but there are a few things, apparently, he doesn’t know.

source:  
[http://www.boston.com/globe/search/stories/nobel/1994/1994x.html](http://www.boston.com/globe/search/stories/nobel/1994/1994x.html)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\
**Post date:** [July 25, 2000, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibilitie/26414/23 "2000-07-25T19:20:43Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> …declaring the ability to speak infallibly (neat trick, that one, eh?)

No different really than the trick used in logic, declaring that reason is a valid epistemology. Why? Well, it’s only _reasonable_.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![2sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/e47774/32.png) [@2sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2sense)\
**Post date:** [June 27, 2001, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibilitie/26414/24 "2001-06-27T06:03:36Z")

</div>

So in order to believe it one merely has to abandon logic?

[sub]Go ahead, tell me I’m right for a change. I dare you. ;)[/sub]

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![2sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/e47774/32.png) [@2sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2sense)\
**Post date:** [June 27, 2001, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibilitie/26414/25 "2001-06-27T06:10:28Z")

</div>

I followed **ruadh** ’s advice in [this thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=75468) and forgot this wasn’t the original thread.  
I was in such a hurry to be clever that I quickly leaped to the reply screen to be able to post under **Lib**.

Sorry about bumping the thread.

:: _slinks away in shame_ ::

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibilitie/26414.md?page=1)