Does the Pope actually have ANY authority??

[setmefree]

Sort of confused on this matter. This latest encyclical has been met with a lot of resistance by some. Would you all be so kind as to inform me about papal authority. Im fairly sure I get the part about speaking ex-catherda. Is everything else optional? I would think one of the appeals of Catholicism is that there is a living breathing person to look to as a genuine source of information and inspiration. Am I wrong? Do written documents hold more water then say an off the cuff remark? Do encyclicals have some sort of rating scale for their validity? Say 1 for only minimally important or a 10 for extremely important?
Over the years I have listened to and read many commentators and lay Catholics virtually condemn so called cafeteria Catholics and hold themselves up to be "truly" Catholic. So what is the difference? If you decide you don't like a particularly Pope or what he says or writes which one are you?

On a side note I have copied a scathing review of the Catholics who hold a very low view of this Pope. Its a comment made on a New York times article. Can I post it here?

 

[IHOM]

When the pope speaks on matters of faith and morals in the chair of peter... ex cathedra proclaiming doctrines to be believed by all the faithfull then He is speaking infallibily unless a isnt cannoically elected such as the anti popes throughout history a pope can be elected but his election can still be invalid say if a pope held a secret heresy in his heart.

An encyclical is a theorotical view it is not infallible..

i think such a story would be of interest

 

[bill5]

Sort of confused on this matter. This latest encyclical has been met with a lot of resistance by some. Would you all be so kind as to inform me about papal authority. Im fairly sure I get the part about speaking ex-catherda. Is everything else optional? I would think one of the appeals of Catholicism is that there is a living breathing person to look to as a genuine source of information and inspiration. Am I wrong? Do written documents hold more water then say an off the cuff remark? Do encyclicals have some sort of rating scale for their validity? Say 1 for only minimally important or a 10 for extremely important?
Over the years I have listened to and read many commentators and lay Catholics virtually condemn so called cafeteria Catholics and hold themselves up to be "truly" Catholic. So what is the difference? If you decide you don't like a particularly Pope or what he says or writes which one are you?

On a side note I have copied a scathing review of the Catholics who hold a very low view of this Pope. Its a comment made on a New York times article. Can I post it here?

No.

 

[MikeK]

Ex Cathedra statements are not the only ones that Catholics are obliged to ascent to. The teachings of Encyclicals are to be believed and the practices they call for adopted by the flock. It is not a requirement that we like all Popes, but we should all humbly aknowledge their authority to teach on matters of faith and morality (and the recent Encyclical very patiently explained why these environmental concerns are life issues, moral issues) and eagerly adapt our positions to match theirs.

 

[IHOM]

But they are not infallible

 

[MikeK]

But they are not infallible

Correct. It is possible that they are errant. Unlikely, but possible.

 

[stray bullet]

Sort of confused on this matter. This latest encyclical has been met with a lot of resistance by some. Would you all be so kind as to inform me about papal authority. Im fairly sure I get the part about speaking ex-catherda. Is everything else optional? I would think one of the appeals of Catholicism is that there is a living breathing person to look to as a genuine source of information and inspiration. Am I wrong? Do written documents hold more water then say an off the cuff remark? Do encyclicals have some sort of rating scale for their validity? Say 1 for only minimally important or a 10 for extremely important?
Over the years I have listened to and read many commentators and lay Catholics virtually condemn so called cafeteria Catholics and hold themselves up to be "truly" Catholic. So what is the difference? If you decide you don't like a particularly Pope or what he says or writes which one are you?

On a side note I have copied a scathing review of the Catholics who hold a very low view of this Pope. Its a comment made on a New York times article. Can I post it here?

Catholicism is not about the Pope. Catholicism is about a faith that has persisted since Christ and the apostles. The faith grows through the experience of the faithful and the guidance of the bishops. That is, Catholicism is what the apostles taught. But Catholics understand that faith more and more through experience over time. Bishops exist to keep that faith from going contrary to what the apostles taught.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

The primary role of the Pope is to preserve the deposit of faith. When he teaches from the chair on matters of Christian faith and/or morals we must agree with him. But we can respectfully disagree with him when he is talking outside of Christian faith and/or morals. The current encyclical is unusual in that it speaks of some things that are not relating to faith or morals, and it actually says in it that the Church isn't making a definitive judgment. For more about this see the following:

"It is the mission of the Magisterium to affirm the definitive character of the Covenant established by God through Christ with His People in a way which is consistent with the 'eschatological' nature of the event of Jesus Christ. It must protect God's People from the danger of deviations and confusion, guaranteeing them the objective possibility of professing the authentic faith free from error, at all times and in diverse situations. It follows that the sense and the weight of the Magisterium's authority are only intelligible in relation to the truth of Christian doctrine and the preaching of the true Word." - Donum Veritatis

"When comparing doctrines with one another, they should remember that in Catholic doctrine there exists a 'hierarchy' of truths, since they vary in their relation to the fundamental Christian faith." - Unitatis Redintegratio

"The Roman Pontiff and the bishops, in view of their office and the importance of the matter, by fitting means diligently strive to inquire properly into that revelation and to give apt expression to its contents; but a new public revelation they do not accept as pertaining to the divine deposit of faith." - Lumen Gentium, 25

"Let no Christian therefore, whether philosopher or theologian, embrace eagerly and lightly whatever novelty happens to be thought up from day to day, but rather let him weigh it with painstaking care and a balanced judgment, lest he lose or corrupt the truth he already has, with grave danger and damage to his faith." - Humani Generis

 

[setmefree]

Catholicism is not about the Pope. Catholicism is about a faith that has persisted since Christ and the apostles. The faith grows through the experience of the faithful and the guidance of the bishops. That is, Catholicism is what the apostles taught. But Catholics understand that faith more and more through experience over time. Bishops exist to keep that faith from going contrary to what the apostles taught.

Would you please make this as clear as possible to me. Are you saying that you personally don't think this encyclical has any authority and therefore can be followed or ignored depending on your own views? Also do you personally believe that this Pope has authority over the Catholic church and it members?

 

[Armoured]

The Pope has authority over the Catholic Church. And Vatican City.

What other authority would you like him to have?

 

[WarriorAngel]

Sort of confused on this matter. This latest encyclical has been met with a lot of resistance by some. Would you all be so kind as to inform me about papal authority. Im fairly sure I get the part about speaking ex-catherda. Is everything else optional? I would think one of the appeals of Catholicism is that there is a living breathing person to look to as a genuine source of information and inspiration. Am I wrong? Do written documents hold more water then say an off the cuff remark? Do encyclicals have some sort of rating scale for their validity? Say 1 for only minimally important or a 10 for extremely important?
Over the years I have listened to and read many commentators and lay Catholics virtually condemn so called cafeteria Catholics and hold themselves up to be "truly" Catholic. So what is the difference? If you decide you don't like a particularly Pope or what he says or writes which one are you?

On a side note I have copied a scathing review of the Catholics who hold a very low view of this Pope. Its a comment made on a New York times article. Can I post it here?

He's the Teacher of the Church... and so he is authoritative in matters of doctrine, dogma et al.

ETA and over the priest line [Bishops etc]

 

[pdudgeon]

Would you please make this as clear as possible to me. Are you saying that you personally don't think this encyclical has any authority and therefore can be followed or ignored depending on your own views? Also do you personally believe that this Pope has authority over the Catholic church and it members?

I believe that the Pope has spent hours and hours writing this encyclical, and that he knows exactly what he wants to say.
I also believe that trying to second guess what his words mean is a waste of time and effort.
There is no 'spin' needed for those who accept that he is Pope.

for your second question, yes I believe that this pope was duly elected by the cardinals of the electoral college, and that the full authority first given by Jesus Christ to the Apostle Peter, and which authority has been handed down since that time, is invested in this Pope.
I believe that he is the vicar of Christ on earth, and as such that he has been given the responsibility to teach, to administer, to counsel, to admonish, to guide, to guard, to uphold, and to defend both the Church and the people of God, the sheep of his pasture, against satan and all his minions.

 

[twob4me]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MOD HAT ON!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This thread has gone through a clean up to removed some Off Topic (OT) posts along with some Flaming and Profanity. We are reopening the thread but if you continue to post like you were the thread can and will be closed permanently and those involved may find themselves with staff actions.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~MOD HAT ON!!!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Would you please make this as clear as possible to me. Are you saying that you personally don't think this encyclical has any authority and therefore can be followed or ignored depending on your own views? Also do you personally believe that this Pope has authority over the Catholic church and it members?

He's basically saying that Catholicism isn't just about one particular Pope and that therefore the Pope's authority and teaching can't override or abrogate any doctrine of Christian faith and morals that came before.

 

[Isaacsname]

Idk, after that video that circulated a year or so ago, of him picking and eating a booger...........it haunts me.....it's hard for some reason, to think about the spiritual authority of a man who eats his own snot

 

[WarriorAngel]

Idk, after that video that circulated a year or so ago, of him picking and eating a booger...........it haunts me.....it's hard for some reason, to think about the spiritual authority of a man who eats his own snot

Everyone has that 'one' fault or two...or many.
It goes to show the Holy Spirit works thru human beings in spite of our defects.
It's not something that appeals to me - but thankfully it's not his gross habits i should be paying attention to.

 

[Root of Jesse]

The Pope has authority, yes. He can declare things. What he opens, no one can shut, what he shuts, no one can open. In matters of faith and morals.
However, the Pope has no authority to impose his will. He can propose things, but it's up to the faithful to find it in their hearts to do those things. Again, in matters of faith and morals.

 

[LivingWordUnity]

Winepress77,

"Call no man father" just means that we should not treat any leader on earth as if he is above God the Father.

 

[setmefree]

Would you please make this as clear as possible to me. Are you saying that you personally don't think this encyclical has any authority and therefore can be followed or ignored depending on your own views? Also do you personally believe that this Pope has authority over the Catholic church and it members?

I would like to apologize for this particular part of my inquiry about Papal authority. It was written with a feeling of some anger on my part. Im sorry I made this so personal.

 

[IHOM]

Out of curiosity say if a cardinal is elected pope who try as he might he just can not believe jesus was the son of god.. would that pope still be valid?