To: ebb tide; aMorePerfectUnion; ealgeone; Alex Murphy; bkaycee; boatbums; CynicalBear; daniel1212; ...
Francis is not a Protestant.
He’s a Catholic, elected by the Catholic church college of cardinals to fill the highest position within the Catholic church.
Like it or not, he’s all yours.
You can try to disown him, but that isn’t going to fly unless there’s an official action of the Catholic chruch to ex-communicate him.
So, the question remains, does the Holy Spirit guide the college of cardinals in the selection and election of the new pope? Simple question that just needs a simply *Yes* or *No* answer.
88 posted on 11/17/2017, 7:46:18 PM by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith..) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To which ebb replied:
To: metmom
No. And He never has.
Otherwise all elections would have occurred on this first vote with an unanimous decision.
94 posted on 11/17/2017, 7:55:33 PM by ebb tide (We have a rogue curia in Rome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
So we finally have ebb on record as saying the selection of the pope is not guided by the Holy Spirit.
I wonder if his fellow (?) Roman Catholics agree with him?
No. And He never has. Otherwise all elections would have occurred on this first vote with an unanimous decision.
The answer by ET might eliminate Mattias, chosen by the non-political OT means of casting lots, (Prov. 16:33) - which Rome has never used - as being guided by God, but to deny that Holy Spirit guides the college of cardinals in the selection and election of the new pope, so that the man they choose is His choice as in selecting Saul and David, need not mean that God does not make the carnal choices of men work toward His plan. Which He does even with the reprobation of the devil and the Fall of man.
And which appeal to Divine Providence is a recourse of RCs (https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=1454) who admit that God does not guide the college of cardinals in the selection and election of the new pope. Catholics can rightly argue that God enjoins obedience even to evil civil rulers, insofar as this obedience does require disobedience to God, and as with Caiaphas, such can speak Divine counsel due to being in the office of the High Priest.
However, Caiaphas did not define doctrine not intend to, but prophesied as per his office, nowhere is the promise given that those in that office will forever be infallible whenever they speak according to an infallibly defined scope and subject-based criteria.
Nor does possessing valid authority mean that dissent must be wrong when when speaking on the next magisterial level, under the premise of protection from salvific error, even if not speaking infallibly. God provided Truth and preserved faith by sometimes raising up men who were without the established magisterium and who reproved those in it. Which is how the NT church itself began.
And thus there can be no assurance of veracity and requirement of implicit obedience based upon the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome (and basically in primary cults), or even protection from only salvific error. The only wholly inspired substantive body of the words of God is Scripture, not the words of RC popes.
And thus the appeal to Divine Providence does not ensure that the choices of the Cardinals (whom RCs are enjoined to follow as docile sheep under the headship of the pope) will not be that of electing a devil, but neither can implicit obedience be required to such.
Moreover, while traditionalists contend for the validity of dissent from the pope and parts of V2, charging him and the body of cardinals with bd judgment and even heresy based upon their judgment of what valid church teaching is and means, this is contrary to the RC model which they tell us we need to submit to the pope and bishops overall, and not ascertain the validity of church teaching based upon our judgment of what valid church teaching is (the NT) and means.
Never deny.
Rarely affirm.
Always distinguish.
There are a number of ways a thing, a person, or a group of people can be guided by the Holy Spirit. One is “in spite of [itself/himself/themselves.]
There are also a number of ways one can appropriately “submit” to a pope. As I think I may already have said, one is like the way one submits to a “difficult” grandparent: one listens with respect and affection, one looks for what is good in what he says or does, one cuts him some slack.
As I approached the banks of the Tiber to swim across I considered that while the then pope was wonderful (IMHO,) there was a lot of history of popes who weren't. So my entering full communion had to be viewed not in the context of J2P2, but with respect to the “matrix" in which he arose.
IOW, I was prepared for PapaFran. For me he is an occasion and opportunity to develop patience and humility, in both of which I am deficient. I am not scandalized by him — irritated yes, but not scandalized.