election process of popes

[kimber1]

so i have a serious question. in reading history about the Popes and the whole election process that's gone on in the past adn seeing in some instances that bribes were involved to sway the whole process, how then can we be assured that the men who have served as Pope and will continue to serve are 100% willed by God to even be in that postion?

it makes me question the whole Pope being the head of the Church thing completely. i mean i think the concept is correct. i just question whether these men are truely the representatives of the Church as God intended?

[Fish and Bread]

If we start with the premise that God intended for there to be an uninterrupted line of Popes that were his representatives, it would make sense that he would either offer a process himself that we would have to follow to assure this, or authorize whatever process the church came up with so. So, if we accept the initial premise, I think that the Popes picked would have to be real Popes in the respect of being the Vicar of Christ, even where perhaps they were not the actual individual persons Christ would have preferred (i.e. he dealt with the reality people people gave him).

On the other hand, if we throw out the initial premise that God intended for there to be Popes, then maybe they aren't Vicars of Christ at all. Ultimately most religious arguments hinge on certain individual premises taken on faith.

[kimber1]

i just think that even though the concept is correct and what God intended, that if the process is tainted by bribes and such, are they truely the Lord's representatives? know what i mean? i mean, how can these be truely godly men and hold the power of the Church in their hands when they won an election in such an unjust manner?

[Fish and Bread]

i just think that even though the concept is correct and what God intended, that if the process is tainted by bribes and such, are they truely the Lord's representatives? know what i mean? i mean, how can these be truely godly men and hold the power of the Church in their hands when they won an election in such an unjust manner?

Historically, there have been many Popes who have not been what would have widely been considered to have been Godly men. Many had numerous mistresses. There is even a Pope who was famous for hiring large groups of prostitutes to... well, we won't go there on a family message forum. :)

I think the idea is not so much that the Pope is always going to be holy in his personal life or even in all his decisions, but rather that he is protected in a very limited way by virtue of his office in terms of certain definitions on faith and morals and so forth. That does leave of areas where the Pope can error and people are still bound to obedience. I am not sure it's a fair system, to be honest, but it is the system if one accepts the authority of the Pope.

[nyj]

so i have a serious question. in reading history about the Popes and the whole election process that's gone on in the past adn seeing in some instances that bribes were involved to sway the whole process, how then can we be assured that the men who have served as Pope and will continue to serve are 100% willed by God to even be in that postion?

it makes me question the whole Pope being the head of the Church thing completely. i mean i think the concept is correct. i just question whether these men are truely the representatives of the Church as God intended?There is no such guarantee. All that is promised is that those people who are not fit to serve, but are placed there irregardless ... will not do irrevocable harm (the gates of hell and all that jazz).

[Protinus]

so i have a serious question. in reading history about the Popes and the whole election process that's gone on in the past adn seeing in some instances that bribes were involved to sway the whole process, how then can we be assured that the men who have served as Pope and will continue to serve are 100% willed by God to even be in that postion?

it makes me question the whole Pope being the head of the Church thing completely. i mean i think the concept is correct. i just question whether these men are truely the representatives of the Church as God intended?


A compelling question, however, I think the election of local bishops and even parish priests is essential to consider, even to start with....and more oversight by the layity in all matters financial and the running of local parishes.

[nyj]

A compelling question, however, I think the election of local bishops and even parish priests is essential to consider ...Aren't parish priests usually already essentially a product of the environment they've grown up in?

They're supported by the diocese (and directly by parishoners) throughout their entire formation.

[kimber1]

There is no such guarantee. All that is promised is that those people who are not fit to serve, but are placed there irregardless ... will not do irrevocable harm (the gates of hell and all that jazz).meaning i guess that even if the man is essentially not fit to be pope that he won't be able to make any 'new' rules that would go against the Church's Traditions and such?

[Protinus]

Aren't parish priests usually already essentially a product of the environment they've grown up in?

They're supported by the diocese (and directly by parishoners) throughout their entire formation.

I know that this is not true in NYC- especially with education and missionary orders like the Jesuits, however, it is more important to consider that the faithful be impowered to elect their own priests.

[nyj]

meaning i guess that even if the man is essentially not fit to be pope that he won't be able to make any 'new' rules that would go against the Church's Traditions and such?Essentially, yes. Plus, it helps to understand that the Pope is not the sole representative of the Magesterium, he is simply the first amongst equals (the rest of the bishops).

[nyj]

I know that this is not true in NYC ...The Archdiocese of New York doesn't have a vocations program and a seminary? That's interesting because the last time I went to visit my grandmother in Queens (I grew up there [still part of NYC last time I checked], and spent 7 years as an altar server at Our Lady of Perpetual Help) we prayed for one of their seminarians. Or does just the Diocese of Brooklyn send their seminarians off to discern their vocation?

[Protinus]

The Archdiocese of New York doesn't have a vocations program and a seminary? That's interesting because the last time I went to visit my grandmother in Queens (I grew up there [still part of NYC last time I checked], and spent 7 years as an altar server at Our Lady of Perpetual Help) we prayed for one of their seminarians. Or does just the Diocese of Brooklyn send their seminarians off to discern their vocation?

Saint Joseph's seminary in Yonkers has had fewer and fewer called to vocation. I am involved with 3 churches in Manhattan (for the last 20 years). They have not seen one seminarian come through- (two jesuit, one dominican)

[nyj]

Ok.

So, now I'm curious ... how would you propose we "elect" priests? From a current pool of priests? Pull people from the congregation? Something similar to Protestant denominations, where the priesthood becomes a sort of career?

[PostTribber]

should be more like a beauty contest: which ever is 'cut' and knows his 'stuff'. :thumbsup:

[Protinus]

If the Jesuits support a specific group of churches and are bound to supply them with priests, then the parish would vote on the priests that the order offers. We should promote aggressive recruitment from the parish for those that are called to the diaconate and lay ministry. Otherwise, the parish supported seminarian should have deference.

[Miss Shelby]

it is more important to consider that the faithful be impowered to elect their own priests.
So much for vocations being a calling. Make it a democratic process, why not?

[nyj]

How is a parish going to know enough about several Jesuit priests to effectively vote for one? Besides, don't the Jesuits take a vow of obedience which means obeying their superior? What if the superior doesn't want to send that priest to that particular parish?

[Protinus]

How is a parish going to know enough about several Jesuit priests to effectively vote for one? Besides, don't the Jesuits take a vow of obedience which means obeying their superior? What if the superior doesn't want to send that priest to that particular parish?

He would have that right but the hypothetical ability to approve of who he does send would rest with the parishioners.

[nyj]

He would have that right but the hypothetical ability to approve of who he does send would rest with the parishioners.And if once he gets there, the parishoners suddenly feel as if they made a huge mistake ... then what?

What if 51% want one, and 49% want another? Do you allow half your congregation to feel disenfranchised? Would you want to saddle a priest with that sort of burden right out of the gate?

[Protinus]

And if once he gets there, the parishoners suddenly feel as if they made a huge mistake ... then what?

What if 51% want one, and 49% want another? Do you allow half your congregation to feel disenfranchised? Would you want to saddle a priest with that sort of burden right out of the gate?

I do not think that the Church is a democracy, I am advocating for more layity control in the selection and empowerment of it's own priests, especially local bishops. This would involve something more solemn that "grace periods" or "progress reports". It would involve elected members of a parish council interviewing and working with priests as to their ability to thrive in a local parish and thus helping the parish thrive as well.

[nyj]

I do not think that the Church is a democracy, I am advocating for more layity control in the selection and empowerment of it's own priests, especially local bishops. This would involve something more solemn that "grace periods" or "progress reports". It would involve elected members of a parish council interviewing and working with priests as to their ability to thrive in a local parish and thus helping the parish thrive as well.Sounds more like a republic.

[Protinus]

Sounds more like a republic.
not so, although with the addition of a full time paid parish administrators and support staff (parish CEO and COO) the ordained priests and pastors would be freed up to preside over the sacraments, core ministry and spiritual direction and religious education of the parish.

The administators would have oversight over capitol and operating budgets, fiscal strengthening, fund raising and budgets.

[nyj]

not so, although with the addition of a full time paid parish administrators and support staff (parish CEO and COO) the ordained priests and pastors would be freed up to preside over the sacraments, core ministry and spiritual direction and religious education of the parish.The parish I'm at now has a full time parish administrator. She handles a ton of stuff, well beyond what one would expect from a secretary. When I was in Oklahoma, it was the same thing. This is nothing new under the sun, I imagine it's like this in a lot of places.

CEO's and COO's? Are we running a business or a church?

The administators would have oversight over capitol and operating budgets, fiscal strengthening, fund raising and budgets.I think that priests should definitely be taught more than just the basics in accounting, and there should be plenty of checks and balances in the budgetary systems of individual parishes ... but I disagree with placing them into the hands of people who would run the parish like a business.

In the parishes I've been a member of (and elected to the parish council in one of them when I could really afford to be uber-involved) the priest has always involved the parish directly, and through the parish council, on major financial decisions. Many of the things you're suggesting ... seem to already be in place and working just fine as they are.

[JasonV]

Did not the 1st century Church elect their Presidents (ie Bishops)?

[Protinus]

Did not the 1st century Church elect their Presidents (ie Bishops)?

yes, and it even extended until the fourth century. Saint Augustine himself was elected.

[Fish and Bread]

If priests are elected, how would one handle priest distribution? For example, let's say "Father Bob" is ordained. Who decides where he serves? Does he get to decide? If he settles in somewhere and wants to go elsewhere, can he just hop over to whatever parish will elect him? What happens if some parishes get no priests? What if some priests don't get elected to serve anywhere (Having taken vows of celibacy, it might not be fair to ask them to become auto-mechanics)? Just some practical kinks that would have to be worked out. Interesting idea, though!

[Protinus]

If priests are elected, how would one handle priest distribution? For example, let's say "Father Bob" is ordained. Who decides where he serves? Does he get to decide? If he settles in somewhere and wants to go elsewhere, can he just hop over to whatever parish will elect him? What happens if some parishes get no priests? What if some priests don't get elected to serve anywhere (Having taken vows of celibacy, it might not be fair to ask them to become auto-mechanics)? Just some practical kinks that would have to be worked out. Interesting idea, though!


I don't think it would be easy...I am just proposing more lay oversight in the selection of their own priests. It is a two way street as well. I'm sure that there are more priests that would advocate for themselves if they were elected and avail themselves to the process.

As to the availability of priests, why can't archdioceses "profit share" like the NFL and support more rural or inner city parishes where there is a paucity of priests? My parish happens to be very wealthy. It could more than handle the support of a sister parish and promote priest availability and recruiting.

[JasonV]

My parish happens to be very wealthy. It could more than handle the support of a sister parish and promote priest availability and recruiting.

Might that offer extend to non-Roman Catholics? ;)

[Protinus]

Might that offer extend to non-Roman Catholics? ;)

well taken Jason:wave:

[kimber1]

Essentially, yes. Plus, it helps to understand that the Pope is not the sole representative of the Magesterium, he is simply the first amongst equals (the rest of the bishops).huh? i thought that was Orthodox thinking, not Catholic?

allright protty dear, quit hijacking my thread on POPES. it's about POPES not priests :P i'm kidding, i kid. but it really was a quesiton about popes:P

[JasonV]

Kimber,

I see what you're saying about Popes. What do you know about Cataphrygians (ie. Montanism) ?

[nyj]

huh? i thought that was Orthodox thinking, not Catholic?This has always been Catholic thinking (primus inter pares - Latin for first amongst equals). This is the position the Pope (also the Bishop of Rome) takes in the Magesterium.

[Protinus]

allright protty dear, quit hijacking my thread on POPES. it's about POPES not priests :P i'm kidding, i kid. but it really was a quesiton about popes:P
you are absolutely right!!! :o

[fragmentsofdreams]

I'm not sure how well election of priests would work. It would be nice to return to more local selection of bishops. Having the pope choose them is better than having the state in charge, but I would prefer to return to the original situation.

[fragmentsofdreams]

The parish I'm at now has a full time parish administrator. She handles a ton of stuff, well beyond what one would expect from a secretary. When I was in Oklahoma, it was the same thing. This is nothing new under the sun, I imagine it's like this in a lot of places.

CEO's and COO's? Are we running a business or a church?

I think that priests should definitely be taught more than just the basics in accounting, and there should be plenty of checks and balances in the budgetary systems of individual parishes ... but I disagree with placing them into the hands of people who would run the parish like a business.

In the parishes I've been a member of (and elected to the parish council in one of them when I could really afford to be uber-involved) the priest has always involved the parish directly, and through the parish council, on major financial decisions. Many of the things you're suggesting ... seem to already be in place and working just fine as they are.

Every diocese should have an internal auditor to help create checks and balances and ensure they are implemented. My dad worked as an internal auditor for a while. I can see the difference between that diocese and the others I've been in. If I were so inclined, I probably could get away with taking a little from the collection here when I'm helping out. There would be no possibility of doing that at my parent's church without multiple unrelated families being involved.

[fragmentsofdreams]

huh? i thought that was Orthodox thinking, not Catholic?

allright protty dear, quit hijacking my thread on POPES. it's about POPES not priests :P i'm kidding, i kid. but it really was a quesiton about popes:P

Catholics emphasize first. Orthodox emphasize equals.

[kimber1]

Kimber,

I see what you're saying about Popes. What do you know about Cataphrygians (ie. Montanism) ?
i'll admit not much. i've heard the term Montanism but i can't quite recall what it means:P

[Protinus]

Wasn't Tertullian excommunicated for becoming a Montanist?

[JasonV]

i'll admit not much. i've heard the term Montanism but i can't quite recall what it means:P

Montanists believed that if the consecrator wasn't "pure," then the person consecrated did not receive the Episcopate. Much like the idea you are suggesting, if the Papacy was purchased, is it still valid?

Believe it or not, this same question was asked and ultimately condemned by the early Church.

I'd also like to share something I just read a couple days ago by ++Leadbeater:

"If the faithful had to institute an exhaustive enquiry [sic] into the private character of a priest before they could feel certain of the validity of the Sacraments received from his hands, an element of intolerable uncertainty would be introduced, which would practically render inutile this wondrously-conceived device of the Christ for the helping of His people."

And still further he writes:

"To compare great things to small, to attend a celebration of the Holy Eucharist is like going to a bank to draw out a sum of money in gold; the teller's hands may be clean or dirty, and assuredly cleanliness is preferable to dirt; but we get the gold all the same in either case."

And finally:

"...the key which unlocks a certain door has been placed in his [the Priest's] hands and it is the opening of the door which chiefly concerns us." (Science of the Sacraments, 310-311.)

Wasn't Tertullian excommunicated for becoming a Montanist?

Yep. Shame though, as he was one heck of a thinker!

[fragmentsofdreams]

Montanism creates a massive headache for apostolic succession. A while ago when some conservatives wanted to declare the ordination of homosexuals invalid, my first thought was about how that could mean that none of our clergy are ordained and no one is confirmed.

A pope has the Petrine and Pauline charisms even if he doesn't put them to use.

[Protinus]

Montanism creates a massive headache for apostolic succession. A while ago when some conservatives wanted to declare the ordination of homosexuals invalid, my first thought was about how that could mean that none of our clergy are ordained and no one is confirmed.

A pope has the Petrine and Pauline charisms even if he doesn't put them to use.


I'm glad you're here frag!!!:thumbsup: