Question about Catholicism and the Pope

[Joe Biden 2020]

One question I have about how the Catholics view the Pope.  Mind you, I'm not trying to be critical, I'm just curious.  Do the Catholics view the Pope as a sinless, inerrant person?  or do they view him just like any other mortal, sinful man just with a lot more respect?

I heard one answer from a Baptist in Sunday School last Sunday morning (August 17), but I wanted to hear from the mouths of Catholics before deciding if its true or not.

[Хahar 🤔]

The Pope is human. He is only infallible on very select occasions, and if he speaks heresy, he ceases to be Pope.

A Baptist church generally isn't the best place for information on Catholicism.

[Keystone Phil]

A Baptist church generally isn't the best place for information on Catholicism.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

LOL. And people call me uniformed on Catholicism.

[12th Doctor]

One question I have about how the Catholics view the Pope.  Mind you, I'm not trying to be critical, I'm just curious.  Do the Catholics view the Pope as a sinless, inerrant person?  or do they view him just like any other mortal, sinful man just with a lot more respect?

I heard one answer from a Baptist in Sunday School last Sunday morning (August 17), but I wanted to hear from the mouths of Catholics before deciding if its true or not.

The Pope is seen as a normal mortal, just like everyone else.  The Pope can sin... in fact, being Pope has never been understood to mean that you necessarily are a wonderful, holy person (though that's what we always aim for, of course).

We believe that Papal Infallibility only applies when the Pope is speaking to the Universal Church, for the Universal Church.  He must be acting in his capacity as the head of the Church (and he must state this to be the case), to say that something is true absolutely and without a doubt, to the world.  These are called ex cathedra statements, or statements made "from the Chair" of Peter.  And thus, not everything the Pope says or does is believed to be infallible.  The conditions I listed must be met.

Papal Infallibility is not a reference to the Pope as an individual, but rather to the Pope as a leader of the Universal Church.  We believe that the Pope is not infallible himself, but rather is prevented from making errors of teaching when speaking for the Church, by the Holy Spirit.  Jesus taught us that the "Gates of Hell" would never prevail over his Church, and that the Holy Spirit would guide it.  If the Pope every taught something that was blatantly untrue and proclaimed that to be dogmatic, then that would mean Christ's promise to us is broken, which of course can't happen, and that the Church will have become anti-Christ and thus Hell will have prevailed.

If you have any further questions, I would be happy to answer.  I'm not stating things as best I can, cause I'm getting a little tired.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Is the Pope required to be an ordained Priest?  Could the College of Cardinals elect a non-Priest, if they wanted?

[12th Doctor]

Is the Pope required to be an ordained Priest?  Could the College of Cardinals elect a non-Priest, if they wanted?

Technically, any confirmed, Catholic male can be elected pope.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Is the Pope required to be an ordained Priest?  Could the College of Cardinals elect a non-Priest, if they wanted?

Technically, any confirmed, Catholic male can be elected pope.

     I can't remember any names offhand, though I remember reading about one or two popes who were elected while being laymen.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Is the Pope required to be an ordained Priest?  Could the College of Cardinals elect a non-Priest, if they wanted?

Technically, any confirmed, Catholic male can be elected pope.

There's one of the reasons why I find the whole concept of the office offensive.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

What's the basis of authority for the Pope?  Is it Biblical, tradition, or something else?

[True Democrat]

Is the Pope required to be an ordained Priest?  Could the College of Cardinals elect a non-Priest, if they wanted?

Technically, any confirmed, Catholic male can be elected pope.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard that if a non-cardinal (or mabye it was a non-bishop) is elected Pope, then that person must move up through the ranks before he can officially become Pope (for example, a priest elected Pope must first be elevated to bishop and then to cardinal).

[12th Doctor]

Is the Pope required to be an ordained Priest?  Could the College of Cardinals elect a non-Priest, if they wanted?

Technically, any confirmed, Catholic male can be elected pope.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard that if a non-cardinal (or mabye it was a non-bishop) is elected Pope, then that person must move up through the ranks before he can officially become Pope (for example, a priest elected Pope must first be elevated to bishop and then to cardinal).

If a man has already been ordained a bishop when elected, then he automatically becomes Pope on acceptance of his election, he simply must be installed as the Bishop of Rome.  If, however, a man who is not ordained is elected, then at the installation ceremony, he must also be ordained as a Bishop, and does not become Pope officially until that happens.  In the past, men who weren't even ordained priests were occasionally elected (they were usually monks), so they would have to be ordained a priest, a bishop and then installed.

Almost all Cardinals are ordained bishops... it would be highly unusual were one not.  I'm not 100% certain, but I think tis canon law that you have to be a bishop to be a Cardinal, now.  Of course there are so many titular sees now (sees that no longer really exist, but are still required to exist on paper) that anyone can simply be handed one of those and made bishop of that place with no real duties.

[12th Doctor]

What's the basis of authority for the Pope?  Is it Biblical, tradition, or something else?

Both... I have to get ready to go to class, but I'll get back to you on this question.

[12th Doctor]

What's the basis of authority for the Pope?  Is it Biblical, tradition, or something else?

Both... I have to get ready to go to class, but I'll get back to you on this question.

Actually, a better answer is to say that his authority is purely scriptural, but comes with the authority of tradition.

Again, I'll get back to this.

[HappyWarrior]

What's the basis of authority for the Pope?  Is it Biblical, tradition, or something else?

My understanding is that when Jesus said that Peter would be the rock his church was founded on, this gave Peter authority as the first pope.  After that it was the tradition so-as to always have a man holding Christ's spot as leader of the church until his return to the world.  I'm sure that I have some sort of inaccuracies in there but thats my basic understanding after 18 years in a Catholic church lol.

[12th Doctor]

What's the basis of authority for the Pope?  Is it Biblical, tradition, or something else?

My understanding is that when Jesus said that Peter would be the rock his church was founded on, this gave Peter authority as the first pope.  After that it was the tradition so-as to always have a man holding Christ's spot as leader of the church until his return to the world.  I'm sure that I have some sort of inaccuracies in there but thats my basic understanding after 18 years in a Catholic church lol.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.  The Pope is the successor to Peter, not to Christ, and Peter is not the successor of Christ either.  To make such a claim would be to be anti-Christ.  Again, I'll be back later.

[HappyWarrior]

What's the basis of authority for the Pope?  Is it Biblical, tradition, or something else?

My understanding is that when Jesus said that Peter would be the rock his church was founded on, this gave Peter authority as the first pope.  After that it was the tradition so-as to always have a man holding Christ's spot as leader of the church until his return to the world.  I'm sure that I have some sort of inaccuracies in there but thats my basic understanding after 18 years in a Catholic church lol.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.  The Pope is the successor to Peter, not to Christ, and Peter is not the successor of Christ either.  To make such a claim would be to be anti-Christ.  Again, I'll be back later.

Don't need to flip out on me.  I know its a poor explanation and even not what I exactly meant by it.  I told you it might sound befuddled.

[12th Doctor]

What's the basis of authority for the Pope?  Is it Biblical, tradition, or something else?

My understanding is that when Jesus said that Peter would be the rock his church was founded on, this gave Peter authority as the first pope.  After that it was the tradition so-as to always have a man holding Christ's spot as leader of the church until his return to the world.  I'm sure that I have some sort of inaccuracies in there but thats my basic understanding after 18 years in a Catholic church lol.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.  The Pope is the successor to Peter, not to Christ, and Peter is not the successor of Christ either.  To make such a claim would be to be anti-Christ.  Again, I'll be back later.

Don't need to flip out on me.  I know its a poor explanation and even not what I exactly meant by it.  I told you it might sound befuddled.

Why do people think I am flipping out all the time?

I'm not, but you have to remember that the way things are phrased is very important when you are talking about these things, because, for instance saying that the Pope is the successor of Jesus would automatically set up the Pope as the anti-Christ.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How does that work exactly?

[afleitch]

I have kind words to say about the Papal office and those who have served. I have harsh words to say about Ratzinger the man.

[Хahar 🤔]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How does that work exactly?

Nothing he says after he speaks heresy is valid; the Vatican is considered to be in a state of sede vacante. This is useful ex post facto; the papacy hasn't always been in the good state it is today.

[7,052,770]

The sad thing is that most Baptists don't even have the courtesy to ask and see if their blatantly wrong ideas about Catholicism are correct.
Props to BushOklahoma for at least trying to find out the truth.

[12th Doctor]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How does that work exactly?

Nothing he says after he speaks heresy is valid; the Vatican is considered to be in a state of sede vacante. This is useful ex post facto; the papacy hasn't always been in the good state it is today.

This is correct.  If the Pope ever dogmatically teaches heresy, then he automatically ceases to be Pope, at least spiritually, and becomes an anti-pope.  Even if this is not recognized as the case by the larger part of the Church, and remains in the Vatican.  Ideally, though, he would lose all authority.

BTW... I promise to get around to an in depth explanation of papal authority.  My schedule has been busy.

[Justin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How does that work exactly?

Nothing he says after he speaks heresy is valid; the Vatican is considered to be in a state of sede vacante. This is useful ex post facto; the papacy hasn't always been in the good state it is today.

This is correct.  If the Pope ever dogmatically teaches heresy, then he automatically ceases to be Pope, at least spiritually, and becomes an anti-pope.  Even if this is not recognized as the case by the larger part of the Church, and remains in the Vatican.  Ideally, though, he would lose all authority.

BTW... I promise to get around to an in depth explanation of papal authority.  My schedule has been busy.

Although that seems to be an opinion of Cardinal Bellarmine. It seems that others like Aquinas are of the opinion that it is a moot point in so far that event just would never happen ever.

[12th Doctor]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How does that work exactly?

Nothing he says after he speaks heresy is valid; the Vatican is considered to be in a state of sede vacante. This is useful ex post facto; the papacy hasn't always been in the good state it is today.

This is correct.  If the Pope ever dogmatically teaches heresy, then he automatically ceases to be Pope, at least spiritually, and becomes an anti-pope.  Even if this is not recognized as the case by the larger part of the Church, and remains in the Vatican.  Ideally, though, he would lose all authority.

BTW... I promise to get around to an in depth explanation of papal authority.  My schedule has been busy.

Although that seems to be an opinion of Cardinal Bellarmine. It seems that others like Aquinas are of the opinion that it is a moot point in so far that event just would never happen ever.

Correct, but the possibility has been discussed, in the event of.