Papabili

[Patrie si Credinta]

În prealabil postat de Cornel Urs

uitati-va in Biblie, sa vedeti ca, pentru stabilirea unor aspecte dogmatice importante, stalpii Bisericii de atunci, Iacov, Ioan si Petru, au intrebat pe Duhul Sfant Fapte 15:28

dar cand nu este Duhul sfant, se fac ovatii, se voteaza, alegeri etc !

zici ca la noi nu se aleg arhiepiscopii.

Axios!

[Mihailc]

În prealabil postat de Patrie si Credinta

Axios!

Ei întreabă, ei răspund.
Aaaxiooos??????
Axios dară....!
Vrednic este?!
Vrednic de numa'!

Eu cred ca va iesi Tarcisio Bertone.

[adam000]

Mihnea, cum vad catolicii infailibilitatea papala, prin prisma acestei demisii?

[Patrie si Credinta]

În prealabil postat de adam000

Mihnea, cum vad catolicii infailibilitatea papala, prin prisma acestei demisii?

cu riscul de a ma baga ca musca , dar ce legatura are una cu alta.

asta inseamna infailibilitatea papala:

Catholic dogma states that the Pope is incapable of making an error when he makes a formal declaration to the Church regarding certain matters of faith or morals, provided he attaches to the declaration the requisite conditions and formalities. This doctrine is known as Papal infallibility.

To those not fully versed in the doctrine, this may at first sight seem ridiculous. After all, what if the Pope says that elephants are pink?

Infallibility comes with several conditions:

The Pope must be speaking in his official capacity as head of the Catholic Church. While the Pope might well say that elephants are pink, for some reason or other (hey, stranger things have happened), he probably wouldn't do so as an official statement.
The statement must be worded as an explicit definition of truth. So even if the Pope was speaking in an official capacity, merely stating that elephants are pink is not good enough. He'd have to say something like, "The Church solemnly declares, decrees, and affirms the absolute and inviolable fact that elephants are pink."
The statement must be accompanied by an additional statement that this teaching is absolute and binding to all members of the Catholic Church, and that any who disagree with it are immediately outside the realms of the Catholic faith. So the Pope has to say something, in an official capacity, like:
The Church solemnly declares, decrees, and affirms the absolute and inviolable fact that elephants are pink. If anyone, God forbid, should question or deny the self-evident truth of this teaching, or cause doubt of it to any member of the faithful, then let it be known to all that that person has fallen from the Catholic faith, may God have mercy on his miserable misguided soul.
Now I don't know about you, but I reckon the Pope is highly unlikely to say anything like this about the colour of elephants. But still, he potentially could, which brings up the final condition:
The statement must concern the revelation of matters of faith or morals. This is the real killer. The Pope can rave about the colour of elephants all he likes, but it will never count as an infallible statement, because the colour of elephants is not a matter of faith or morals. (It would be an interesting religion in which this was a matter of faith, and an even more interesting one in which it was a moral issue.)
In fact, Papal infallibility has rarely been invoked. The most recent instance was in 1950, when Pope Pius XII made the infallible statement in the Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus_Deus that:
By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory. Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.
This is clearly a matter of faith. If you're anything like me (before researching this annotation), you probably don't even have a good idea what this actually means. It refers to the Assumption of Mary, which is the teaching that Mary (the mother of Jesus) was transported bodily into Heaven at the end of her life on Earth, as opposed to her body simply dying and decaying down here like all the rest of us, while only our souls go to Heaven (if you believe this in the first place). Interestingly, the question of whether Mary died first, and then was transported to Heaven, or if she was transported before death, has long been a point of theological debate in the upper echelons of the Catholic church. Pius XII's infallible statement appears to be carefully worded so as to avoid this aspect of the issue altogether. Make of that what you will.
This is, so far, the only time that the Pope has explicitly invoked infallibility, since the dogma of infallibility itself was only defined in 1870, by the First Vatican Council. Catholic theologians are in general agreement that the 1854 pronouncement of Pope Pius IX on the Immaculate Conception was also an instance of infallibility, since the rules apply retroactively. A few other cases are posited as possible infallible statements over the previous centuries, but there is no consensus on any of those.

[adam000]

Infailibilitatea, din cate inteleg, tine nu de faptul ca este un episcop, ci ca este papa - tine numai in exercitiul sau de papa, prin aceasta aratandu-se ca alegerea sa ca papa a fost din voia Lui Dumnezeu care are grija ca papa sa fie infailibil. Decizia ca el sa fie papa nu a fost luata cu a lui putere, ci puterea prin care slujeste bisericii (din care rezulta infailibilitatea) i-a fost data de Dumnezeu care l-a pus sa slujeasca acolo, in acel mod (cam asa inteleg eu, ortodox, cu, recunosc ca foarte putinele mele cunostiinte despre catolicism).
In acest context, exemplul tau de mai sus cu elefantii roz este corect, intrucat aceea nu este o chestiune legata de biserica catolica si de slujirea papei in biserica, nu este supusa infailibilitatii.
Insa, in chestiunile legate de slujirea papei in biserica catolica, din cate inteleg, ei cred ca insusi Dumnezeu se ingrijeste ca papa sa slujeasca fara greseala, fara contributia sa ca om care greseste.

Astfel, daca Dumnezeu l-a pus papa, i-a dat aceasta slujire, a fost voia Lui Dumnezeu sa fie astfel, atunci, in momentul in care isi da demisia, acea decizie de a nu mai sluji (voii Lui Dumnezeu?) bisericii catolice, este luata de el ca om in aceasta chestiune ce tine de biserica? Adica nu mai are grija Dumnezeu ca in acele chestiuni legate de biserica sa fie exclusiv voia Sa (infailibilitate), ci lasa liber liberul arbitru al slujitorului Sau sa ia decizii dupa cum il taie pe el capul ca om, deci supus greselilor? Tocmai intr-o chestiune legata de slujire? Tocmai intr-o chestiune bisericeasca?
Pai atunci, inseamna ca Dumnezeu ii lasa libertatea sa ia decizii dupa capul lui de om supus greselilor si in alte chestiuni care tin de slujirea sa ca papa, si in alte chestiuni ale bisericii (de crediinta?) - adica poate ca nu e atat de infailibil pe cate credeau ei si ca acum li se arata si lor acest lucru prin aceasta demisie a papei?

[horatiu.miron]

Cred că or să-l puna papă pe ăla negru, e mai tânăr și probabil că BC vor să pară și ei mai hip, în ton cu timpurile. Tot degeaba, dar ar fi o zbatere, mă-nțelegeți?