Do Non-Catholics See the Papacy as Power or Responsibility?

[JRKH]

I am just wondering how others view this.

When non-catholics look at Papal Authority are they looking primarily at the “Power” of that authority or the “Responsibility” of that authority?

Non-catholics, have issues with the Papal Authority. This authority is a large roadblock to them ever becoming Catholic. For Catholics, the aurhority seems completely natural and right. My belief is that this dichotomy arises from a misunderstanding of what this authority entails. I believe that what Non-Catholics percieve in Papal Authority is “Power” and what catholics see is largely “Responsibility”.

Authority can be judged in two ways, the first, the perspective of power, and the second the perspective of responsibility. The first perspective, power, is the perspective of the world. Anyone with “Authority” is in a position of “Power”, and we are automatically leery of that, especially in the U.S.A. The second perspective, responsibility, is the perspective of God. Any one in a position of Authority must be aware of their responsibility to those they have authority over and where the authority comes from. So let us look at these in relation to the Teaching authority of the Church and the Office of the Pope.

Papal Authority carries little in the way of power in the sense that we in the world understand it. The Pope cannot force anyone to convert. He cannot force anyone to accept Church teaching. Even as the head of the Vatican State, he can do little besides use his “moral influence” to effect temporal, international affairs. So the “Power” of the Papacy lies strictly in the realm of “moral” authority to guide the faithful successfully to Heaven.

Papal Authority, on the other hand, carries an unfathomably huge amount of responsibility, particularly when one considers the balance between that responsibility and the corresponding power. The Pope carries the responsibility for church teaching. He carries the responsibility for the proper and correct guiding of over a billion souls. Jesus made it clear when discussing the responsibilities of the Jewish Authorities. He told the Jews to do as their leaders instructed because the leaders sat on the chair of Moses, but He also made it clear that the teachers would be held to account for their teachings. Certainly this teaching is just as true today. He who teaches will be held accountable for the accuracy of that teaching.

So my question to the group is this –
When non-catholics look at Papal Authority are they looking primarily at the “Power” of that authority or the “Responsibility” of that authority?

Peace
James

 

[MarcoPolo]

So my question to the group is this –
When non-catholics look at Papal Authority are they looking primarily at the “Power” of that authority or the “Responsibility” of that authority?

My experience with non-Catholics has varied. But as to the average forum-style anti-Catholic, they certainly view him as a symbol of man-made power, perhaps even from hell. He is not viewed as a servant but as a dictator.

There are more reasoned non-Catholics on this forum though who know better.

 

[Veritas41]

My experience with non-Catholics has varied. But as to the average forum-style anti-Catholic, they certainly view him as a symbol of man-made power, perhaps even from hell. He is not viewed as a servant but as a dictator.

There are more reasoned non-Catholics on this forum though who know better.

This is true. I used to be an evangelical Protestant, and the predominant view among the people I knew (ranging from fundamentalist Baptists to charismatics) was that the papacy was about power, not servanthood or responsibility.

 

[estesbob]

My experience with non-Catholics has varied. But as to the average forum-style anti-Catholic, they certainly view him as a symbol of man-made power, perhaps even from hell. He is not viewed as a servant but as a dictator.

There are more reasoned non-Catholics on this forum though who know better.

He is viewed as having total power over Catholics. I once had someone ask me what would happen if I didn’t bow to the Pope and kiss his ring if I was in his presence.I replied absolutely nothing.He didn’t believe me. I guess he thought they would drag me down into the torture chambers under the Vatican and pull my nails out.

I think that if a Catholic who was actually adhering to the teachings of our Church was to run for President he would have this problem with a significant portion of the electorate.

 

[NDfan]

I am just wondering how others view this.

So my question to the group is this –
When non-catholics look at Papal Authority are they looking primarily at the “Power” of that authority or the “Responsibility” of that authority?

Peace
James

James I will answer as a former Catholic. I always saw the Papacy as a responsibility. But I believe that man has infused power into the Papacy. Many early Popes exercised power from their role to try and rule state affairs. That doesn’t mean they were correct but I think this is where many non-catholics lose toleration if you will. They see the Papacy as a power hungry office that wants to tell everyone what to do and when to do it.

In my personal humble opinion I see the Pope as a spiritual leader of the church. One among many. Being able to trace apostolic roots back to Peter while rich for our history doesn’t imply responsibility for the entire church. It’s simply not possible for any man to have that kind of reach. In our daily lives here in the USA we never hear anything from the Pope aside from an occasional visit every 5-10 years or so. Authority really falls down to the Bishops who carry more in their diocese than the Pope himself does.

I would simply ask if the Papacy did not exist would the church fall?? No that’s impossible because it is protected. It’s not the Pope who’s protected it’s the church itself.

PEACE

 

[MarcoPolo]

I would simply ask if the Papacy did not exist would the church fall?? No that’s impossible because it is protected. It’s not the Pope who’s protected it’s the church itself.

You are one of the non-Catholics on this forum I mentioned as more reasonable.
But from a Catholic perspective, the Church would hypothetically fall of course, because the Papacy is the Rock and the source of unity upon which the Church is built by and through Christ.

 

[JRKH]

James I will answer as a former Catholic. I always saw the Papacy as a responsibility. But I believe that man has infused power into the Papacy. Many early Popes exercised power from their role to try and rule state affairs. That doesn’t mean they were correct but I think this is where many non-catholics lose toleration if you will. They see the Papacy as a power hungry office that wants to tell everyone what to do and when to do it.

I do think that you are correct re: temporal power in this respect; The Papacy was infused with temporal power in the waning days of the Roman Empire in the west. Then during the Dark Ages it served as a moralizing authority within the, Mainly Catholic" governments of the time.
Of course those days are long gone.

In my personal humble opinion I see the Pope as a spiritual leader of the church. One among many. Being able to trace apostolic roots back to Peter while rich for our history doesn’t imply responsibility for the entire church. It’s simply not possible for any man to have that kind of reach. In our daily lives here in the USA we never hear anything from the Pope aside from an occasional visit every 5-10 years or so. Authority really falls down to the Bishops who carry more in their diocese than the Pope himself does.

I would simply ask if the Papacy did not exist would the church fall?? No that’s impossible because it is protected. It’s not the Pope who’s protected it’s the church itself.

PEACE

This is an interesting perspective - a bit off topic - but worth comment.
In the mind of a catholic, it is going to be impossible to seperate the office of Pope from the Church. Therefore one need not ask oneself this question. The office of the Papacy is protected precisely because it is part of the Church and this is the way that Christ set it up.

I do hope to hear from more Non-Catholics on this subject. I feel it is a good oportunity to learn from each other and gain understanding.

Peace
James

 

[gcnuss]

As a non-Catholic I see both power and responsibility. There is undoubtedly power – the Pope speaks and 1 billion Catholics are obliged to listen. Such power carries with it a heavy responsibility.

I would point to John Paul II and Benedict XVI as examples of popes who have carried both well. At the same time, it is possible to point to past popes who, while they “talked the talk” did not “walk the walk.” I have spent some time exploring the accounts of various popes in the Catholic Encyclopedia. The evaluations of some of those popes is that they were probably not the best examples of living what the Church teaches. I think that with the power comes the responsibility for living as an example to the faithful.

Of course, this applies to all of us as well. Whether it is accurate or not, Christianity is judged not so much by what it teaches as it is by the observations of how the faithful live out their faith.

 

[Wesley7]

Honest answer- I see the papacy as ecclessiastical dictatorship.
.

 

[JRKH]

Honest answer- I see the papacy as ecclessiastical dictatorship.

So, in other words, you see purely the “Power” and none of the “Responsibility”.

Is that Accurate?

Peace
James

 

[Wesley7]

So, in other words, you see purely the “Power” and none of the “Responsibility”.

Is that Accurate?

Peace
James

Why can’t the Pope just liberate common Christians from his jurisdictional demands?

In other words, ‘let us go’.
. .

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by JRKH
So, in other words, you see purely the “Power” and none of the “Responsibility”.

Three Comments:
First - I would not term ANY Christian as “common”.

Second - The Pope cannot “enforce” his will upon anyone. Only the persons, call by God to His Catholic Church come under the jurisdictional authority of the Pope. Therefore, the Pope cannot “Liberate” anyone.

Third - Am I missing the answer to my question above? That you erally see the Papacy only in terms of Power and not in terms of Responsibility?

Peace
James

 

[Wesley7]

Three Comments:
First - I would not term ANY Christian as “common”.

Second - The Pope cannot “enforce” his will upon anyone. Only the persons, call by God to His Catholic Church come under the jurisdictional authority of the Pope. Therefore, the Pope cannot “Liberate” anyone.

Third - Am I missing the answer to my question above? That you erally see the Papacy only in terms of Power and not in terms of Responsibility?

Peace
James

I think the jurisdictional demands are a little excessive. There are opinions,statements,and arguments that apologize the Pope and at the same time there are official doctrines and teachings that support and re-enforce the jurisdictional demands of the office in the Roman Church. In other words, there is teaching apologizing the Pope and at the same time there are doctrines and teachings supporting and re-enforcing the office. And yes, all civil leaders have certain responsibility.

 

[Wesley7]

Three Comments:
First - I would not term ANY Christian as “common”.

Second - The Pope cannot “enforce” his will upon anyone. Only the persons, call by God to His Catholic Church come under the jurisdictional authority of the Pope. Therefore, the Pope cannot “Liberate” anyone.

Third - Am I missing the answer to my question above? That you erally see the Papacy only in terms of Power and not in terms of Responsibility?

Peace
James

I think I understand the papacy. It is an ecclessiastical dictatorship with jurisdictional demands. There are opinions,statements,and arguments that apologize for the Pope but at the same time there are official doctrines and teachings of the Roman Church that re-enforce the office. (a circular contradiction) And to be specific, I am not anti-Catholic.

And yes, all civil leaders have a certain responsibility.

 

[MarcoPolo]

There are opinions,statements,and arguments that apologize for the Pope

Curious…what did you read that apologized for the Pope?

 

[JRKH]

I think I understand the papacy. It is an ecclessiastical dictatorship with jurisdictional demands. There are opinions,statements,and arguments that apologize for the Pope but at the same time there are official doctrines and teachings of the Roman Church that re-enforce its doctrines,dogmas,and teachings. And to be specific, I am not anti-Catholic.

And yes, all civil leaders have a certain responsibility.

Thank you.
For the record, I never got the sense that you were anti-catholic.

I also see that, in answer to my original question, you do see the papcy almost completely from the standpoint of power. You refer to it as a “dictatorship” and to “jurisdictional demands” while only mentioning “responsibilities” in a general “civil” sense.

Based on what you have posted so far it leads me to believe that you may not understand the papacy as well as you might think you do.

Do you think of the Papacy as something a person would pursue? That someone would actively seek that power?

Peace
James

 

[mercygate]

I think I understand the papacy. It is an ecclessiastical dictatorship with jurisdictional demands. There are opinions,statements,and arguments that apologize for the Pope but at the same time there are official doctrines and teachings of the Roman Church that re-enforce the office. (a circular contradiction) And to be specific, I am not anti-Catholic.

And yes, all civil leaders have a certain responsibility.

Could you give us an example of “dictatorship” and “demands” that contribute to your position?

 

[KenEOTE]

He is viewed as having total power over Catholics. I once had someone ask me what would happen if I didn’t bow to the Pope and kiss his ring if I was in his presence.I replied absolutely nothing.He didn’t believe me. I guess he thought they would drag me down into the torture chambers under the Vatican and pull my nails out.

I think that if a Catholic who was actually adhering to the teachings of our Church was to run for President he would have this problem with a significant portion of the electorate.

I do not view the Pope as having total power over Catholics. Infact in some Catholics he has little if any influence. Those of course are the ones that say I am Catholic because my mom and dad go to church.

I think he is a servant but in servanthood he shows true power. The power of the Holy Spirit is one that humbles himself for Christ.

I have to disagree with the idea that a Catholic would have a hard time running for President, It didn’t Hurt JFK at all. And Kerry didn’t lose cause he was Catholic he lost cause he wasn’t a very good canidate.

 

[Wesley7]

Could you give us an example of “dictatorship” and “demands” that contribute to your position?

Unam Sanctam

papalencyclicals.net/Bon08/B8unam.htm

Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

Are you going to apologize for this encyclical?

 

[mercygate]

Unam Sanctam

papalencyclicals.net/Bon08/B8unam.htm

“All creatures must be subject to the Roman pontiff for salvation”

Ah. Before I became Catholic, I felt the same way. But if you walk around to the other side of the tent, and see the context in which that bull was written, it makes perfect sense.

It comes down to Our Lord’s statement “No one comes to the Father except by me.” Of course, a lot of people have a problem with the necessity of Christ as well.