Papabili

[Patrie si Credinta]

În prealabil postat de Mihnea Dragomir

Multe simpatii intruneste si card Peter Turkson, primul cardinal din Ghana din istorie, care a facut lucruri apreciabile pentru Biserica sa. Pe de o parte are avantajul ca e african si negru, Biserica nemaiavand un papa negru de multe secole.

stai, a fost veodata un papa negru?

O singura problema am, sa nu zica "Yes, we can"

[Cornel Urs]

În prealabil postat de Mihnea Dragomir

Cand cardinalii nu pot ajunge nicicum la un acord, exista posibilitatea numirii unui outsider, a cuiva care "nu e in carti", lucru care poate duce la rezultat imprevizibil.

deci pana la urma, recunoasteti ca alegerea este facuta de oameni si nu de Dumnezeu, care nu a instituit un "scaun petrin", asta fiind o blasfemie, sa pui omul pe un "scaun", cand in realitate, toti trebuie sa fim in genunchi inaintea lui Dumnezeu.

[ioanna]

În prealabil postat de Patrie si Credinta

stai, a fost veodata un papa negru?

Au fost vreo doi sau trei Papi din nordul Africii (zona magrebului) prin sec.III-V, deci se presupune ca au avut ten mai inchis, masliniu (cum sunt algerienii, tunisienii, egiptenii etc.), dar n-am auzit de un Papa negru. Insa, tot ce-i posibil sa fie ales acum.

Primul caz, cel al unui francez, este practic exclus: "fiica cea mare a Bisericii" nu vine cu niciun candidat papabil.

Cum se fac alegerile? Se anunta din timp lista celor care doresc sa-si asume responsabilitatea, care se considera capabili sa ocupe scaunul papal si din acestia cardinalii aleg, castigatorul fiind desemnat cel ce obtine 2/3 din voturi? Sau publicului nu i se spune cine candideaza, dezvaluindu-i-se numai numele alesului? Cand a fost ales papa Benedict s-a spus ca au fost nevoie de patru sedinte de vot, ceea ce mi s-a parut ciudat, caci asta inseamna ca dupa primul vot, nu li s-a spus nici macar cardinalilor (nu noua) cine au iesit pe primele doua locuri, iar la sedinta a doua sa aleaga pe unul dintre ei.

[Mihnea Dragomir]

Nu exista o lista de candidati. Sunt trei modalitati de alegere, la latitudinea cardinalilor:
-prin ovatii, sub inspiratie. Caz in care e nevoie de unanimitate.
-prin desemnarea a trei, cinci sau sapte cardinali care sa aleaga.
-prin vot, modalitatea uzuala in zilele noastre.

Cine candideaza, precum si cine voteaza cu cine, sunt lucruri aflate sub secret eclezial absolut. Niciun cardinal nu are voie sa spuna cu cine a votat un confrate de Colegiu, nici chiar dupa moartea acestuia. "Conclav" inseamna "(incuiati impreuna) cu cheia". Tot ceea ce lumea stie dinainte este cand anume au loc scrutinuri, ca sa se poata ruga. De obicei, au loc unul sau doua scrutinuri pe zi. Cand lumea vede fumul alb pe cosul Capelei Sixtine, inseamna ca avem papa. Curand dupa aceea, iese decanul cardinalilor (in prezent card Angelo Sodano) si anunta cine este noul Papa.
Desi noul papa exercita pe deplin ministerul petrin din clipa alegerii sale, se obisnuieste sa fie instalat, ca orice ierarh. El primeste atunci inelul petrin si pallium-ul (omoforul petrin). Cu acel prilej, el tine o cuvantare importanta, in care anunta principalele lucruri pe care le doreste de la pontificatul sau.

[Cornel Urs]

În prealabil postat de Mihnea Dragomir

Nu exista o lista de candidati. Sunt trei modalitati de alegere, la latitudinea cardinalilor:
-prin ovatii, sub inspiratie. Caz in care e nevoie de unanimitate.
-prin desemnarea a trei, cinci sau sapte cardinali care sa aleaga.
-prin vot, modalitatea uzuala in zilele noastre.

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 !

[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.