We report, you decide:
Posted on 08/28/2015 8:38:05 AM PDT by FR_addict
We report, you decide:
With regards to papal infallibility, it is a negative power that has a strictly defined use:
-The Pope must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians, not merely in his private capacity as a theologian, preacher or allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. It must be clear that he speaks as spiritual head of the Church universal.
-Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible.
-Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense. These are well-recognized formulas by means of which the defining intention may be manifested.
-Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the Pope intends to bind the whole Church. To demand internal assent from all the faithful to his teaching under pain of incurring spiritual shipwreck (naufragium fidei) according to the expression used by Pius IX in defining the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin. Theoretically, this intention might be made sufficiently clear in a papal decision which is addressed only to a particular Church; but in present day conditions, when it is so easy to communicate with the most distant parts of the earth and to secure a literally universal promulgation of papal acts, the presumption is that unless the pope formally addresses the whole Church in the recognized official way, he does not intend his doctrinal teaching to be held by all the faithful as ex cathedra and infallible.
The number of ex cathedra decisions defined dogmatically throughout the history of the Church is a matter of some debate, but is relatively small given the near 2,000 year history of the Church. A Catholic theologian named Klaus Schatz, in a study released in 1985, listed seven.
More details here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm
With regards to the Vicar of Christ title, it is symbolic of the Pope’s primacy in jurisdiction over the universal Church. A “vicar” in general is someone who is acting as the agent of a superior; it has been used for ecclesiastical positions other than that of the Pope, but the particular titles associated with the pontiff over the centuries include “Vicar of St. Peter”, “Vicar of Christ”, and “Vicar of the Apostolic See”.
And in the long history of the Church, there have been some truly rotten Popes: Alexander VI. John XII. Stephen VI. Leo X. Benedict IX. Urban VI. Clement VII. I’m sure there have been a few others.
Yet in the course of human history, rife with weak and sinful people, entire nations, peoples, ideas, and languages have risen and fallen, while the Church remains standing. Given how rotten humans can be, that’s a miracle in and of itself.
The Church will survive Pope Francis.
Frank the Hippie Pope strikes again!
Now I have no idea what you’re talking about.
If they don’t bounce this apostate and soon, the Roman Catholic Church is toast.
Its best that churches be individually separate and local. Just like they once were in the early church. That way corruption cannot flow from the top down because there is no top.
It’s not a generic form letter when it addresses the author of child homo books with “in the service of young generations”.
Girly man.
Clearly not. One would have to be in serious denial to believe otherwise.
My point was only that there is no direct evidence that in this case the Pope is not yet connected to the Vatican reply letter responding to the daffy author. Someone read the author’s letter to the Pope, alright, and was either a boob, or agreed entirely with the nasty little book and penned a reply accordingly.
True on all counts. But the pronoun “they” does not directly connect the Pope to penning the damned reply. Of course, with that herd he has placed around him, you bet he is ultimately responsible.
Heavens, there is plenty already where he is directly involved, initiating, or otherwise destroying. This just strikes me as less than direct evidence, this one teeny weeny time. At least, YET.
The Church has been here before. In the 9th Century there was what is called the Synod on Adultery. Catholics may not “leave the Church”, but they can certainly go under ground. There is already a pseudo schism, plainly for all to see, that has been forced by this pope from, oddly, nowhere really.
There is the Traditional Latin Mass and those devoted to it know where those masses are. There are approximately 250 or so in the USA, in every state, so you can see that travel is involved and made difficult. The nearest to me is six hours round trip. I would not be able to attend but possibly monthly.
The friends I referred to are lifelong Catholics and love their church. They aren’t politcally right or left, but they have each expressed their frustration and anxiety about this man. Of course I have nothing much comforting to offer- I’m a former Episcopalian, and we know where they’ve led their church!
Thanks for your insights.
“Who chose this nutcase?” Those voting included Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan, friend of Obama, who functions as a Democratic Party operative (http://dorothydayworker.blogspot.com/2014/09/gay-rights-abortion-infanticide-faith.html), Cardinals Sean O’Malley of Boston and Donald Wuerl of Washington, DC, and Cardinal Roger Mahoney of Los Angeles, who was allowed to vote despite the sex scandals in the archdiocese while he was running it (see http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/cardinal-mahony-priest-abuse.html).
It is beoming increasingly obvious that Francis is the chief nutcase (or “fruit” of the hierarchy’s failure to embrace the truths of the Catholic faith), but there are too many others among our bishops and Cardinals.
Chicago Archbishop Blase Cupich, recently appointed by Francis, has the queer view that engaging in vivisection to obtain unborn babies’ organs is repulsive, but no more repulsive than unemployment, the death penalty, and restrictions on immigration (see http://dorothydayworker.blogspot.com/2015/08/missing-in-action-cardinal-dolan-fails.html).
We should be so lucky.
Care to tell us why the Vatican can take the time to respond positively to the complaint of an author that writes children homo books about them being banned by the mayor? Or why the Pope can personally respond to a lesbian about to marry another woman?
Or why the Pope, or any vatican official for that matter, has not responded, let alone acknowledged, a petition signed by over half a million faithful Catholics, including Cardinals and Bishops, pleading with the Pope to hold up the traditional Church teaching of the Sacrament of Marriage?
LOL. Fruitful.
Two of my “most Catholic” friends are considering leaving the Catholic church over this pope.
The funny thing is, lukewarm Catholics-in-name-only have no problem with him. Only the ones who actually leave social gatherings in order to go to mass.
You’ve made some bad assumptions here.
I am troubled at the pope’s non-traditionalist statements, saying “who are we to judge” and so on.
I’m also not Roman Catholic.
I just think you people are completely insane for judging this pope based on a generic form letter thank you sent by a staff member in response to gifts given.
It doesn’t say anything you hallucinatory people think it says
Ask your Catholic friends if Pope Francis is enough for them to abandon the Eucharist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.