WTF? Pope about to resign?!

[Uncle Sparky]

I'm the American protestant media?
Those silly Catholics always argued that there couldn't be two living Popes at a time - I guess we can now have dozens of popes and ex-popes running around speaking for God. Why not? Its all bs anyway.

[Ben Kenobi]

Those silly Catholics always argued that there couldn't be two living Popes at a time

Indeed, there cannot. Which is why Benedict will be no longer Pope once he has resigned.

[Hauldren Collider]

Does anyone have any ideas on who the next pope will be?

[Kidlicious]

Oh, this is very sad news. I love Papa Benedict.

I was confirmed and just about a week or so later Pope John Paul II passed on. So I've had Benedict most of my time as a Catholic. I love you Benedict. You are one of the good ones.

If for nothing else than bringing out the Ordinariate.

Go forth wise and faithful servant.

Who were the bad ones?

If he was one of the good ones and he resigned, I think that technically makes him a protestant now.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Benedict made it pretty clear back in 2010 that a Pope had the right and duty to resign if he felt he was unable to carry on. I remember the story of that interview where it was made into a big deal that he would even consider it. I think it is the best thing for the Church if he is infirm. The Church needs a dynamic leader in this day and age and Benedict recognizes this fact. This is a truly selfless act in my opinion.

I read somewhere a couple of years ago that there was some concern he was showing signs of possible early stage Alzheimers. Whether that, or the physical strain on an 85 year old, it's sensible to resign rather than try to press on with ever declining ability to do so.

[Ben Kenobi]

Who were the bad ones?

I'm sure you don't need assistance in finding them.

If he was one of the good ones and he resigned, I think that technically makes him a protestant now.

I'm sure that as a faithful Catholic, Ratzinger will have no difficulties pledging obedience to the new Pope.

[Imran Siddiqui]

This is a very good question that deserves a topic all to it's own. No, it's quite a bit more than that. 21 councils + 5, for 26.

Councils, however, are not technically Papal Infallibility - since they come from the Church as a whole, and not the Pope expounding on doctrine.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'm the American protestant media? [ATTACH=CONFIG]173427[/ATTACH]

Would you rather just be called ignorant?

[Ben Kenobi]

Councils, however, are not technically Papal Infallibility - since they come from the Church as a whole, and not the Pope expounding on doctrine.

The Church makes no distinction. Papal Infalliability is an extension of Magisterial Infalliability. This is why it's best to understand it within the overview of the councils. They don't come about by isolation. The vast, vast, majority of Catholic doctrine comes about from the Councils and not ex-cathedra.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Indeed, there cannot. Which is why Benedict will be no longer Pope once he has resigned.

Though they once had three.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The Church makes no distinction. Papal Infalliability is an extension of Magisterial Infalliability. This is why it's best to understand it within the overview of the councils. They don't come about by isolation. The vast, vast, majority of Catholic doctrine comes about from the Councils and not ex-cathedra.

I see what you are saying, but I meant it in terms of responding to when the Pope can speak infallible. Also tends to throw people off when mentioning when the Pope himself has spoken ex cathedra.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Though they once had three.

[PLATO]

Will he still be known as Benedict or will he now be Ratzinger again?

[snoopy369]

Good lord today's an odd day for me. Supporting Al B in one thread, now saying the words...

Ben's right on this one. Ecumenical councils - even NOT led by the pope - are infallible. Wiki has a good explanation of the subject. The concept is the same - the Bishops, similar to the Pope himself, have their authority passed down in an unbroken line from Jesus etc. etc., and thus when speaking as a group on doctrine are infallible.

For a teaching by a pope or ecumenical council to be recognized as infallible, the teaching must be a decision of the supreme teaching authority of the Church (pope or College of Bishops); it must concern a doctrine of faith or morals; it must bind the universal Church; and it must be proposed as something to be held firmly and immutably. The terminology of a definitive decree will usually make clear that this last condition is fulfilled, as through a formula such as "By the authority of Our Lord Jesus Christ and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by Our own authority, We declare, pronounce and define the doctrine . . . to be revealed by God and as such to be firmly and immutably held by all the faithful", or through an accompanying anathema stating that anyone who deliberately dissents is outside the Catholic Church.[17]

Personally when I was a practicing Catholic I generally felt this was logical but not really very important. The problem is that while the office of the Pope is infallible, the man is not, and who's to say that he's speaking with the Authority of God when he says he is? But, at the same time, if we're going to be in a religion that has defined rules etc. (as opposed to just generic Christians who believe in Jesus but don't form an organized religion) we might as well let whomever is in charge decide on the rules we will follow; if you think he is doing a bad job, well, find a new religion.

[kentonio]

Will he still be known as Benedict or will he now be Ratzinger again?

Snoop Popey Pope. He's planning a rap career.