Papal Infallibility

I think it’s unlikely anyone would attribute infallibility to another human being without believing that individual to be in close collaboration with some supernatural entity.  According to the Vatican papal decisions ‘are justly held irreformable, for they are pronounced with the assistance of the Holy Spirit’ (who, according to Martin Luther is no skeptic) and that ‘God protects the pope from error when he speaks about faith and morality.’

So, I guess when Pope Francis said that non-believers, if they were good, moral people, would be welcomed into heaven they (the non-believers) can fully expect to be there.  The only catch is, being non-believers, they probably don’t think there’s an after-life to be welcomed in to.

It seems to me one is better off remaining open minded about such things.  I’m inclined to take Pascal’s Wager: Bet on the existence of God; if he doesn’t exist you lose nothing, if he does and you bet against him you may be in big trouble.  But then, as I think about it maybe Thomas Jefferson had it right:  Question God’s existence; if there be one he must admire the homage of reason, if non-existent  the exercise thereof will have been worthwhile.

4 thoughts on “Papal Infallibility

  1. hm… i had heard the first method, but i really like the second. jefferson may have had something there. if the old man gave us reasoning, he would be pleased to see us using it, yes?

  2. The problem w/ Pascal’s Wager is that you do in fact lose a lot if you lose the bet. I wouldn’t rule out naturalistic bases for ethics, but I think I’d be more inclined to act like a Nietzschean if I was an atheist. I think I would do whatever I could get away with. See Gyges’s ring scenario in Plato’s REPUBLIC.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s