# Papal Infallibility

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibility/20041>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [May 20, 2000, 8:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibility/20041 "2000-05-20T08:21:39Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![MattStL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ccd318/32.png) [@MattStL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MattStL)\
**Post date:** [May 22, 2000, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibility/20041/21 "2000-05-22T20:50:03Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*\*  
> **Jeff\_42** wrote:
> 
> The Vatican Council I of 1870 declared The Pope infallable in proclaiming doctrines of faith and morals. This doesn’t mean `infallable’ in any non-liturgical sense – it is a strictly theological concept. Furthermore, the principle post-dates the worst of the Popes, and nothing they might have declared that would be wrong will be counted as an infallable declaration.  
> \*\*

The Council proclaimed a doctrine which had been believed true for quite some time before the council. And it applied ex post facto. Prior popes who had made a solemn proclamation on faith or morals would be held by the council to be infallible.

But the answer to the meat of the question is a different matter. Papal infallibility in no way implies papal impeccability. A pope can sin - and, all too often, have.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/papal-infallibility/20041.md?page=1)