Posted on 12/02/2015 10:23:06 AM PST by ebb tide
I can understand that, I sometimes watch B16’s election DVD just for the happiness that pours out upon me.
Yes He did, but that does not make my argument less valid.
w/e, n00b....
There is no Catholic teaching that says the Holy Spirit selects the Pope. The only protection given by the Holy Spirit is to ensure that no Pope destroys the Church. In the selection process, He inspires, but that inspiration may be rejected.
Last some Catholic told me was that the Holy Spirit didn't guide the College of Cardinals in selecting the pope.
Is there any official statement on the issue?
Well, if the Holy Spirit doesn’t guide the church in something as basic as the selection of the new pope, then how exactly does He protect the church from error or from being destroyed?
How then, does anyone know what the Holy Spirit’s will is for the Church if they can’t hear Him for something simple, like selection of the pope?
And if the selection of the pope is not guided by the Holy Spirit and they ignore the inspiration given by Him, then how can any pope speak ex cathedra?
The claim that the Holy Spirit is protecting the Church falls flat when He can’t even *protect* it from the wrong man being elected pope.
Sara Johnson, your sympathy is very highly appreciated.
It means that while most RCs see the papacy as essential for preserving the Church, whether a papal election is an infallible act is something RCs can and do disagree on.
"DOCTRINAL COMMENTARY ON THE CONCLUDING FORMULA OF THE PROFESSIO FIDEI" (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) states (emp. mine),
The Magisterium of the Church, however, teaches a doctrine to be believed as divinely revealed (first paragraph) or to be held definitively (second paragraph) with an act which is either defining or non-defining. In the case of a defining act, a truth is solemnly defined by an "ex cathedra" pronouncement by the Roman Pontiff or by the action of an ecumenical council.
In the case of a non-defining act, a doctrine is taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Bishops dispersed throughout the world who are in communion with the Successor of Peter.
With regard to the nature of the assent owed to the truths set forth by the Church as divinely revealed (those of the first paragraph) or to be held definitively (those of the second paragraph), it is important to emphasize that there is no difference with respect to the full and irrevocable character of the assent which is owed to these teachings.
The difference concerns the supernatural virtue of faith: in the case of truths of the first paragraph, the assent is based directly on faith in the authority of the Word of God (doctrines de fide credenda); in the case of the truths of the second paragraph, the assent is based on faith in the Holy Spirit's assistance to the Magisterium and on the Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium (doctrines de fide tenenda).
With regard to those truths connected to revelation by historical necessity and which are to be held definitively, but are not able to be declared as divinely revealed, the following examples can be given: the legitimacy of the election of the Supreme Pontiff or of the celebration of an ecumenical council, the canonizations of saints (dogmatic facts), the declaration of Pope Leo XIII in the Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae on the invalidity of Anglican ordinations. - http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFADTU.HTM
The claim that the Holy Spirit is protecting the Church falls flat when He can’t even *protect* it from the wrong man being elected pope.
May not does not mean cannot, but the problem with the sola papal model of authority, in which one man is alone the supreme authority to which all the church is to look, is that to the degree he goes South then so does much of the flock, while there are left confused when there is doubt over who is the real papa.
But those who look to the Lord and unchanging Scripture have a sure compass and anchor, versus,
"For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become questionable in her whole objective form--the true Church, the true pledge of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution.
"It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, p.196). http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2012/06/13/whos-in-charge-here-the-illusions-of-church-infallibility/)
“Do you think this man believes in the Real Presence?”
I assume he does. I am not a mind-reader.
I oppose the first belief, as well as the second, while even the person who is now the Pope Emeritus said in 1997, when asked on Bavarian television whether or not the Spirit chooses the pope:
"I would not say so, in the sense that the Holy Spirit picks out the Pope. ... I would say that the Spirit does not exactly take control of the affair, but rather like a good educator, as it were, leaves us much space, much freedom, without entirely abandoning us. Thus the Spirit's role should be understood in a much more elastic sense, not that he dictates the candidate for whom one must vote. Probably the only assurance he offers is that the thing cannot be totally ruined."
"There are too many contrary instances of popes the Holy Spirit obviously would not have picked!" - http://ideas.time.com/2013/03/11/does-the-holy-spirit-choose-the-pope/
Thanks for the snarky comment, anti-Catholic Newbie.
The drawing of lots is considered Holy Spirit direction ... by those whose souls are not yet born from above. It is even a mistake the Disciples made when choosing to replace Judas. The religion of catholiciism is rife with magic thinking.
Thanks but 1 capsule of what, and how many mg?
Se #30 above.
Of course, whether all papal encyclicals and public teachings and bulls must be believed by Catholics, or everything the Catechism teaches, or that only infallible decrees require assent of faith, are matters of disagreement.
Actually, it is (non-political) casting lots which is Biblical, (Acts 1:15ff; Josh. 18:6; Prov. 16:33) which Rome has never used, while no apostle was elected using the (often political) means of Rome, under which Italians were most often chosen.
What a way to stack the deck against someone.
Label them right out of the gate without knowing a thing about them.
Is that the best Catholics have in their arsenal to counter debate, slander and discrediting anyone perceived as an opponent as opposed to actually engaging in debate on a topic?
And why should anyone want to respond to the plea to *swim the Tiber* when Catholic treat people like that?
Welcome to FreeRepublic.
I’ve heard good things about turmeric too. Thanks.
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.