Do Catholics actually, unironically, honestly believe in Papal Infallibility? There's no way they actually do that...

>I read all about it in the DaVinci Code.
Fucking lol

Most catholics I know say that cardinals choose the pope. I'm not sure how their theology got so wrapped up with ornithology, but that's what happens when you stop being Christian. They should just follow God and the word of Christ like the baptists do.

>But ask a catholic who chooses the pope,
The Holy Ghost through the Council of Cardinals that reunite and vote. Everyone gets the Holy Ghost at confirmations so the Cardinals, obviously, have it too.
Everyone knows this is How It's explained and How It's supposed to work.
>democracy
It's 100 people representing a billion. Fortunately the process is far from democratic.
You should listen to your waifu more, She would tell you This stuff, she's smart.

>ornithology
lol

why does the holy ghost need a council of cardinals at all?

who chooses the cardinals?

Why does he even need a pope?

why are you so braindead

Attached: 14354844838690.gif (500x281, 855K)

no

Attached: serveimage.jpg (595x800, 64K)

It's just there to nudge them so they don't fuck up too bad.

>The pope is always right
Your view here is far to expansive. Ask any Roman Catholic and they'll tell you the Pope is frequently wrong about many things, and they do so while in keeping with the doctrine of Papal Infallibility. This doctrine is that the Pope is infallible only on matters of faith and morals, but only when speaking ex cathedra ("from the chair"), meaning speaking officially from his position as Pope, which means he's only infallible when he invokes his own authority as Pope to speak on matters of faith and morals. Writings and speech not explicitly published in an official capacity, or on other subjects outside his area of authority, are not considered infallible. For example, if the Pope invoked his authority to offer a comment on which flavor of ice cream tastes the best, that would not be a ruling on faith or morals, so Papal Infallibility would not apply. Another example, if the Pope was bedridden with fever and said abortion is not a sin, Papal Authority would not apply, because he was incapacitated and not invoking his authority as Pope, even if the subject of his utterance was a matter of faith and morals. In short, only very few instances of official Papal rulings are considered infallible by Roman Catholics.

>since he gets his facts straight out of big G God and big G God is always right
God is always right. The Pope draws his doctrinal opinions from the Deposit of the Faith, which is to say the Bible, the Church Fathers, the Ecumenical Councils, etc.

I'm not Catholic, by the way.

What a fucking dishonest post
>Why does He need
He doesn't, We do or else every time the Pope dies hundreds of assholes would get up and say the Spirit chose them to be the New Pope.
>who choses the Cardinals
The Pope based on bishops of experience.
>Why does he even need a pope?
He doesn't. The Pope is however the successor of Peter so We need it so our Church is apostolic (descends from the apostles) and so that the Tzar can't just be a Pope-king for his country thus limitino his absolute power. You can ask England and Russia How cool is to have a king who is also the leader of the Church. Confront with Emperor Henry IV walking barefoot to Canossa to tell the Pope he was sorry.
>Why are you so braindead
No U, You don't even understand the difference between Dogma and ordinary rules chosen for discipline.

Why did Jesus need 12 apostles? who chooses their successors? Why did he even need a pope?

>We do or else every time the Pope dies hundreds of assholes would get up and say the Spirit chose them to be the New Pope.

Haha. Gotcha. I win and you lose. You're basing your "faith" on practicality over spirituality.

Attached: Pegasus.jpg (1100x1081, 552K)

based catholic fundamentalist poster

>Haha. Gotcha. I win and you lose. You're basing your "faith" on practicality over spirituality.
Nobody ever says that the two are incompatible except as a rhetorical device against his enemies. You have exposed yourself as dishonest and contemptible.

he didnt

>the holy ghost works through democracy
yeah im gonna have to stop you there

You are quoting the exact opposite of What i said tho. I supposed it happens when You have no argument.

he did you a favour because your actual statement was a lot stupider

Why do You capitalise Certain words that don't Need to be capitalised?

You simply don't understand what Papal Infallibility means.

I Can Capitalize Any Word I Want. Do You Have An Argument?
It was explained to him and he didn't care.
No u.

The problem is, it only works if you listen to the correct Pope. You never know who might turn out to be an anti-Pope once the history books are written...

The Spirit doesn't wait for the history books to be written

I'm Catholic, I don't believe in Papal infallibility and Biblical inerrancy. Especially when even the Catechism says that the Bible isn't infallible.

Attached: 1568222602398.jpg (958x704, 78K)

You haven't been catechized well

I am vegan and I eat meat everyday.

Considering something like 2/3 of North American Catholics don't even believe in Transubstantiation Papal infallibility probably isn't that far behind.

>North American Catholics don't even believe in Transubstantiation
Everyone north of the río grande should be excommunicated, chapter 46, example 14432476347

Attributing this to Christianity instead of a situation that Christianity happened to make possible is silly, though. The Catholic Monastic love of literature is rooted in the Roman aristocracy buying their way into the Clergy to keep a hold on some semblance of power in the wake of Germanic invasion into Gaul and Hispania and continuing the Roman practice of using book-clubs as means of excluding the "unworthy" from higher economic and political action. This has nothing to do with Christian doctrine or belief. Orthodox monks had no particular fondness for Classical learning or understanding of the physical nature of the universe, and for centuries Europe referred to Ethiopia as the place that forgot the world and as such was forgotten by it.

>The Pagans believed in a very real sense that the Universe was alive. Can't discover the laws of something that can change them. Confront romans not giving a fuck about the dream engine.
Euclid, as you mentioned, was a pagan. Pre-Christian Europeans had no problem assigning physical laws to the universe. Additionally, the Aeolipile was a toy, and more importantly the Romans didn't use coal so using the Aeolipile as the basis for a proper steam engine would have been impossible (recreations demonstrate this).

All culture's have intellectuals, the big break Europe had was having an institution (Monasticism) that congregated intellectuals in one place and gave them an excuse to focus on things other than purely religious matters (the tradition of Aristocratic book clubs). This isn't something particularly unique to Christianity, and it was quickly outpaced by the University (once universities of secular technical knowledge start to proliferate we quickly see them outpace monasteries as centers of technical learning; today, religious institutions contribute an incredibly minor amount of scientific publications per year).

I can agree in principle with some of the things you said in particular regarding the fact hay there wasn't an "active" movement inside the medieval Church to give birth to the scientific method and that it "so happened" that the Church just made each and every right doctrinal and theo logical choice to bring it to fruition in the middle of various alternatives. But:
>Pre-Christian Europeans had no problem assigning physical laws to the universe.
I'm sorry are we talking about the pre-Christian europe that had the presocratics?

>and it was quickly outpaced by the University (once universities of secular technical knowledge start to proliferate we quickly see them outpace monasteries as centers of technical learning;
During the whole period they were still staffed by monks and later Jesuits.

What were the 5 times?

>The Catholic Monastic love of literature is rooted in the Roman aristocracy buying their way into the Clergy to
Yes, that's why Irish Catholicism is so strong in the monastic tradition. All those Romans.