The purpose of the Councils?

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by Lorelei, Jun 9, 2003.

  1. Lorelei

    Lorelei
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="http://www.amacominc.com/~lorelei/mgsm.

    Joined:
    May 25, 2001
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the pope can legislate for the whole church, with or without the assistance of the general council, why is the council ever needed or used?

    Are there some revelations God gives to council members that the Pope does not already have, so he needs their council and advice?

    Does the council have the ability to question the pope and his doctrine?

    It cannot simply be to validify the doctrine if it is not allowed to be questioned to begin with. Also, the voice of a number in people in agreement means very little when the pope was the one who appointed or at least confirmed the council members to begin with.

    So what was/is the purpose of Church councils?

    ~Lorelei
     
  2. GraceSaves

    GraceSaves
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2002
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Pope is not omniscient. God doesn't sit there and whisper in his ear, and thus, doctrine is determined. Doctrine comes from study of God's word, of discussion, etc. This is how the Church has always operated. The Pope, like the Vice President in case of a tie occurring in the senate, gets the final say so, and what he says, goes, because by virtue of his office, he will not be able to "vote" wrongly.

    The revelation is not new; it is the same revelation given to the Apostles; the Church seeks to simply have a continuously better understanding of it. This understanding is entrusted to the bishops, with the final authority resting in the office of the papacy.

    Councils are not to question the validity of existing doctrines. Anything already established is Truth. Councils usually focus on clarification of points in said Truth that may be confusing or not laid out as explicitly as possible, or to discuss such matters as Church discipline, which can and does change.

    Things that are questioned are not dogmas. They are beliefs that the Church has never said, officially, that they are infallibly true.

    Does that mean the President should not listen to the considerations of his cabinet, since he appointed them? I doubt you'll say yes.

    From the catechism:

    85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

    Councils give rise to discussion, and the Pope decides, via guidance of the Holy Spirit, if the matter is Truth or not.

    God bless,

    Grant
     
  3. Lorelei

    Lorelei
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="http://www.amacominc.com/~lorelei/mgsm.

    Joined:
    May 25, 2001
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    0


    Does he get the final say whether or not the vote ends in a tie? For instance, what happens if the pope views a certain way about a doctrine, but that view gets voted down by the council without a tie? The pope doesn't vote because there was no tie, but his view was not upheld. Can he then "veto" it so to speak, was he just considered wrong, or is there actually no vote? According to your last statement it sounds as if there is no vote, the pope gets the final say, this would then NOT be like the Vice President who does NOT have the final say.



    So basically, you are saying that any doctrine given by any pope can be traced back to the apostles?



    So I guess this supports the thought in the above question, you believe there are no new doctrines other than ones dealing with discipline?



    If someone questions the doctrine and THEN the church decides it is infallible, are the people who questioned it still anathema?



    I have no problem with the President or the Pope conferring with thier councils or cabinets, although the president's cabinet IS allowed to disagree with him.

    My problem rises from the fact that there is no outside authority to hold this group and this man accountable to the public.

    If the president is questioned in a serious matter, we do not have his personal cabinet members investigate the allegations of his wrongdoing. We have an outside investigation performed by someone that has NO attachments with the President or is cabinet. To do otherwise would be absurd and I doubt that you would prefer it be any other way.

    But the councils do not play a judiciary role, they are simply forbidden (as is everyone else) to question what the pope says. The only problem is the only reason we know that we cannot question the church is because they, through their popes and councils, have told us so.

    So they merely give insight but have no actual final say since in finality the Pope decides? Am I understanding this correctly?

    ~Lorelei
     
  4. trying2understand

    trying2understand
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2001
    Messages:
    3,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    You've asked a lot of questions here, and in just a couple of posts the discussion has gone far afield.

    I suggest that you start with this link:
    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04423f.htm

    Most of your questions are directly addressed at that site.

    Ron
     
  5. Lorelei

    Lorelei
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="http://www.amacominc.com/~lorelei/mgsm.

    Joined:
    May 25, 2001
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    0


    Just as I thought, thanks for the link.

    ~Lorelei
     
  6. GraceSaves

    GraceSaves
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2002
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lorelei,

    THANK YOU. [​IMG] It seems like for the first time in history, even though you still no doubt disagree with Catholic teaching, you got the answer you sought, and you continued your further questions on another thread, not leading to a 20-page all-out examination of Catholicism in this thread.

    What a breath of fresh air. [​IMG]

    God bless,

    Grant
     

Share This Page

Loading...