Topic(s):  Denominationalism

Todd Clippard

The Bible vs the Catholic Conclave
A Critical Look at the Process of Papal Selection

With the death of John Paul II, 115 Catholic cardinals have selected German cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as their new pope. Ratzinger has chosen the name Benedict XVI as his official papal name. The group who selected Ratzinger is called a conclave. These men are sworn to secrecy under threat of excommunication. The news media abounded with speculation as to who will be the next pope, and now they are awash with experts, apologists, and critics regarding Ratzinger’s selection. Again and again, Catholic apologists claim this process was guided by the Holy Spirit. If it is, then there are some questions these apologists must answer.

According to Catholic doctrine, a two-thirds majority was needed in the voting process to select a new pope. This majority was not reached on the first vote nor on the first day. The cardinals may vote up to four times a day, but if a new pope is not chosen by the third day, voting is suspended for a day of prayer and reflection. The cardinals will reconvene for another seven votes, then another day of prayer. If after twelve days a new pope is not selected, the rules of voting are changed to allow election by a simple majority.

Question: if the Holy Spirit is guiding this process, why did Catholics speculate as to who will be the next pope? And why wasn’t Ratzinger chosen on the first day on the first vote? Could the Holy Spirit not make up His mind?

At least one-third of the cardinals did not vote for Ratzinger on the first day, and it seems unlikely his selection the second day was unanimous. Did the Holy Spirit forget to speak to those cardinals who did not vote for Ratzinger?

Also, if the Holy Spirit guided this entire process, what does it say of the many Catholics who are criticizing the choice? Do they presume to know better who should be pope than the Holy Spirit? Even Catholic apologists are inconsistent in their discussion of Ratzinger’s election. Not only did they speculate as to who might be the next pope, now they are discussing why this particular man was chosen. A common thought is to help de-secularize the church in Europe and the US.

Compare this present situation with the Bible record of how a replacement for Judas was selected. In Acts 1:15-26, and in verses 21-26 in particular, we read of two men chosen from among the 120 disciples. These men had to meet rigorous qualifications as listed in verses 21-22. (Incidentally, the only qualifications to be pope are to be a man and a Catholic.) In verse 24, prayer is made to God to reveal whom He has chosen to replace Judas. In verse 26, a single casting of lots is made and Matthias is chosen to be Judas’ replacement.

Note also the absence of any dissent with the choice of Matthias. Why no dissent? Because everyone involved knew that Matthias was God’s choice, and not that of the apostles. Even when the apostles initiated the selection of the seven servants of Acts 6, the Bible says the decision "pleased the whole multitude" (v 5).

Finally, in Matthew 13, Jesus personally selected the twelve apostles. If Peter was indeed the head of the church, why didn’t he just appoint someone to replace Judas? According to the catechism, the pope "has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered" (882).

When one compares the process by which an apostle was replaced in the New Testament and the means by which a pope is replaced in the Catholic Church today, it is impossible to believe or defend the notion that the Holy Spirit has any part in the process.