Popes, Popes and More Popes? Calling all Catholic experts?

Is it true that there was a pope that could levitate?
Do you think that popes are infallible?
If so what about the crusades?
Why do catholics say martin Luther was a heretic and is burning in hell when he just proved them wrong (On multiple Levels)?

Correct me if im wrong, but that is what I was told by a catholic teacher

2008-03-11T16:44:28Z

Not this pope, another pope long ago (Floating in midair)

2008-03-11T16:45:47Z

btw, it was a religion teacher in a catholic school

2008-03-11T16:56:43Z

yea i think it was a saint who could levatate

Daver2008-03-12T08:15:16Z

Favorite Answer

<<Popes, Popes and More Popes? Calling all Catholic experts?. . . Correct me if im wrong, but that is what I was told by a catholic teacher>>

It sounds to be as if you simply don't understand what it was you were being taught, and that's why you have it "wrong".


<<Is it true that there was a pope that could levitate?>>

Yes. Levitation is a phenomenon in which a human body is raised above ground and sustained in midair without any natural support. At times the body rises to great heights; at other times it glides rapidly just above ground.

Well-documented evidence of levitation is reported in the lives of many saints, e.g., Francis Xavier, Paul of the Cross, Peter of Alcántara, Philip Neri, and Stephen of Hungary. One of the most celebrated was St. Joseph Cupertino (1603-63), Conventual Franciscan, who was treated with no little severity by his ecclesiastical superiors because of the disturbance caused by his raptures.

According to Benedict XIV, in order to verify genuine levitation it is first of all necessary to make a thorough investigation to eliminate any chance of fraud. Then he states that a well-authenticated levitation cannot be explained on merely natural grounds; that this phenomenon is not, however, beyond the power of angels or demons; and that with the saints it is a kind of anticipation of a prerogative of glorified bodies.


<<Do you think that popes are infallible?>>

INFALLIBILITY
Freedom from error in teaching the universal Church in matters of faith or morals. As defined by the First Vatican Council, "The Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra -- that is, when in discharge of the office of pastor and teacher of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the divine assistance promised to him in Blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed in defining doctrine regarding faith or morals; and therefore such definitions are irreformable of themselves, and not in virtue of consent of the Church" (Denzinger 3074).

The bearer of the infallibility is every lawful Pope as successor of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles. But the Pope alone is infallible, not others to whom he delegates a part of his teaching authority, for example, the Roman congregations.

The object of his infallibility is his teaching of faith and morals. This means especially revealed doctrine like the Incarnation. But it also includes any nonrevealed teaching that is in any way connected with revelation.

The condition of the infallibility is that the Pope speaks ex cathedra. For this is required that: 1. he have the intention of declaring something unchangeably true; and 2. he speak as shepherd and teacher of all the faithful with the full weight of his apostolic authority, and not merely as a private theologian or even merely for the people of Rome or some particular segment of the Church of God.

The source of the infallibility is the supernatural assistance of the Holy Spirit, who protects the supreme teacher of the Church from error and therefore from misleading the people of God.

As a result, the ex cathedra pronouncements of the Pope are unchangeable "of themselves," that is, not because others in the Church either first instructed the Pope or agree to what he says. (Etym. Latin in-, not + fallibilis; from fallere, to deceive: infallibilis, not able to deceive, or err.)


<<If so what about the crusades?>>

CRUSADES
The military expeditions undertaken by Christians in the eleventh through fourteenth centuries to recover the Holy Land from the Moslems. The name comes from the cross that the crusaders bore on their clothing. There were eight principal Crusades: the first (1096-99) and the eighth (1270). However, the term is also applied in a wider sense to all expeditions blessed by the Church against heretics and infidels. (Etym. French croisade; Spanish cruzada; Latin cruciata, a marking with the cross.)


<<Why do catholics say martin Luther was a heretic and is burning in hell when he just proved them wrong (On multiple Levels)?>>

A heretic is a person professing heresy. Ecclesiastical law distinguishes between a formal heretic, as one who is sinfully culpable, and a material heretic, who is not morally guilty for professing what may be objectively heretical doctrine.

Martin Luther preached theological fallacies in the name of God, thus making him a heretic. He was right about some things - but wrong about others.

Perhaps you, and your teacher, would do well to check out catholicreference.net.

A Piece of the Rock2008-03-11T17:18:53Z

<<
Is it true that there was a pope that could levitate?
Do you think that popes are infallible?
>>

The Pope is infallible when he makes an *ex cathedra* pronouncement on faith and morals.

The Pope is infallable when he levitates. No Popes have been documented to have been infallable. St. Teresa of Avila was infallable when she levitated, however.


<<
If so what about the crusades?
>>

The Crusades were not infallible, but had there been any flying Crusaders, they would have been infallable.


<<
Why do catholics say martin Luther was a heretic and is burning in hell when he just proved them wrong (On multiple Levels)?
>>

Catholics say Martin Luther was a heretic because he proclaimed beliefs antithetical to those of the Church. Martin Luther was fallable since he never levitated, though he believed God had saved him from falling off his horse during a lightning storm. No Catholic can say reliably that Luther or anyone else is in hell except Judas Iscariot, but Luther was not Judas Iscariot. (Luther was proved wrong on 95 levels).


<<
Correct me if im wrong, but that is what I was told by a catholic teacher
>>

No, you are indeed correct. That is what you were told by a Catholic teacher.

Wolfeblayde2008-03-11T16:49:32Z

I think you or your teacher has confused the popes with St. Joseph of Cupertino, who allegedly could levitate. No pope that I am aware of ever experienced that phenomenon, although several saints have.

And yes, I believe the Pope is infallible when he is speaking "ex cathedra," which means that he is speaking on behalf of the entire Church on matters of faith and morals. This is extremely rare, despite what people may have told you otherwise.

The Crusades were as much about preventing the Muslims from dominating the world as it was about regaining the Holy Land for Christendom -- if not more.

Martin Luther *was* a heretic, but it's not up to your teacher or anyone else to say whether he's in Hell or not. Only God can make that judgment.

But as to the matter of Luther "proving them wrong on multiple levels," that's not at all true. Luther decided that he knew better than the Catholic Church and later admitted that he regretted causing the split. It was only his arrogance and pride that kept him from reconciling with the Church.

Nightwind2008-03-11T16:46:06Z

I've never heard of a levitating pope
Read Miserere's explanation of Papal Infallibility (above)
The Crusades have nothing to do with infallibility
Technically speaking, all Protestants are heretics. A heretic is any Christian holding "wrong" beliefs. In the eyes of the Catholic Church, that includes all Protestants, and Luther was one of the leaders of the Protestant movement. The two sides actually get along reasonably well today. A few centuries ago the two sides were literally going to war and burning each other at the stake over doctrinal differences.

Veritatum172008-03-12T14:46:01Z

You've convinced me to volunteer to teach RCIA and religion classes starting in the Fall.

While there have been stories of charisms (gifts) for miraculous deeds such as levitation, bilocation, teleportation, stigmata, etc., the Church doesn't require belief in any that aren't in Scripture. Same with the apparitions of Mary on a blueberry pancake, etc.

It isn't really the Pope who is infallible, but rather the doctrine pronounced when the Pope speaks for the whole church on a matter of faith. These are very rare instances, and are generally used to end long-standing discussion.

Crusades had nothing to do with infallibility. Pope Urban II said "Hey, let's go rescue the Holy Land from the Muslims!" and thousands took up arms to do so. Historian Thomas Bokenkotter argues that the single greatest achievement was to set back invading Turkish armies that had been at Constantinople's door by about 300 years, as well as to ultimately drive the Moors out of Spain. As far as Urban's promises of martyrdom for those who died in battle, well we'll have to wait til Kingdom Come to see how that turned out.

Martin Luther isn't exactly the most well-liked figure in Church history (and he belongs in Church history since he was a monk at one time). He did point out errors on abuse and indulgences (which were strongly curtailed at the next Council), and the centuries of political violence that followed weren't his fault so much as that of German princes who really wanted the Church's land and used Lutheran arguments as a pretext to reject the Church's authority.

Mind you, Church authority was a definite good thing for much of European history. What most people don't realize is that from the 5th century to the 9th century, there was the Church, the many disparate fiefdoms, and the barbarians. The Church was often the sole unifying authority (except for the briefly-lived Carolingian Empire) and is perhaps the strongest reason why civilization survived at all during this period.

Following the demise of Imperial Rome, the only provider of health care, welfare and learning was the Church because it was the only institution in a position to do so. "Hospital" comes from the latin "hospitium" which was the portion of a diocese budget the Bishop was required to spend on care for the poor, mandated by Canon Law in the 5th century.

Had the Crusades, terrible as they were, not been organized, Europe may very well have been conquered by Muslim invaders.

Had the Church not imposed its control over the various warlords and even emperors, they would have reigned without fear of reprisal. Indeed a German emperor once stood in the snow for three days wearing sackcloth to beg Pope Gregory VI not to excommunicate him; it wasn't contriteness as much as the fear that excommunication meant his lands were fair game for non-excommunicated warlords.

Show more answers (14)