Pope Francis condemned the “very strong, organised, reactionary attitude” in the US church and said Catholic doctrine allows for change over time.
Pope Francis has blasted the “backwardness” of some conservatives in the US Catholic Church, saying they have replaced faith with ideology and that a correct understanding of Catholic doctrine allows for change over time.
Francis’ comments were an acknowledgment of the divisions in the US Catholic Church, which has been split between progressives and conservatives who long found support in the doctrinaire papacies of St John Paul II and Benedict XVI, particularly on issues of abortion and same-sex marriage.
These christians will drop their Pope before they drop their politics
They already have. Only Roman Catholics really care what the Pope has to say. There are far more Baptist, Methodist, Evangelical, Pentecostal, and Presbyterian in the US than Catholics.
The Pope is the head of the Roman Catholic church, it’s always been the case that only Catholics really care about what he says.
*Roman Catholics as multiple churches claim catholicity that are not associated with The Vatican. For example the Anglican Church claims catholicity.
The Anglican Church is Protestant. Pretty sure they don’t like being called Catholic, they had a whole thing about that.
Catholicity is unrelated to Protestantism. Catholicity means the church claims an unbroken line from the apostle Peter meaning they are the “real” church
No, Catholic just means universal. This most Christian denominations claim to the the Catholic, aka, Universal Church. In other words, they mean to say they are the correct denomination.
In normal conversation, Catholic Church equals Roman Catholic Church.
See e.g. wiki:
The Catholic Church, also known as the Roman Catholic Church, …
That doesn’t change the fact that the Anglican Church also considers itself the Catholic Church.
The Act of Supremacy 1558 renewed the breach, and the Elizabethan Settlement charted a course enabling the English church to describe itself as both Reformed and Catholic.
*catholicism
For reasons I can’t explain, many of those denominations don’t even recognize the catholic church as being Christian.
The problem is much more fundamental than this. I have repeatedly had to explain to adults, in many different contexts the subset/superset relationship. People do not know that you can be part of a superset that describes all things in a subset. For some reason you are able to graduate high school without every actually figuring this out
No Child Left Behind really did give out a lot of diplomas to dummies…
That’s always boggled my mind.
I had many childhood baptist friends who claims with disgust that the Catholic Church isn’t Christian.
I just can’t see the reason (there isn’t any) other than needing a conservative out group.
I just can’t see the reason (there isn’t any) other than needing a conservative out group.
The reason is simple, actually. The Protestant revolution was ostensibly started with Martin Luther advertising that the pope was the antichrist.
Protestantism was basically the practice of declaring Catholicism to be a false Church. Then it evolved and they got more cordial. After 300 years of bloodshed
Technically, at the time of Martin Luther, the Roman Church was corrupt AF, so he wasn’t totally wrong. It kind of still is, but hey, who’s counting.
This is a true statement. But glass houses and stones. Let’s not forget he wrote the infamous “On the Jews and Their Lies”, and started supporting their persecution and outright murder. Many believe that his rhetoric directly caused the antisemitic attitudes of the Nazi Party. The aforementioned book was incredibly popular among Nazis.
And the Lutherans are smart to denounce that book. Catholics could learn from a religion deciding it actually did stupid things and fixing itself.
I just didn’t think it was any more or less corrupt as any other Church.
It all seems like an unironic no-true-yorkshirrman comedy sketch.
When I was in the Catholic Church they abused us 17 hours a day!
That’s nothing! When I was in the Protestant Church they abused us 27 hours a day and killed us before bed time.
Etc.
I feel like Martin Luther was an idealist, an innocent “true believer” who got shocked when he saw the harsh reality of what was going on in Rome.
Then he got his reform, established a new Church… and that’s where he went wrong, because sooner or later Churches gonna Church.
TY! All those names are familiar but the events are not.
TIL.
I’m pretty sure the reverse is true.
There are some differences in the details of each denominations beliefs enough to mark some Christians as not real Christians. If only God could just make an announcement over the PA to clear things up…
Related: How many denominations only allow their own denomination to take Communion?
That ship has already sailed - I was just with my conservative uncle this last weekend when he complained that the current pope is “woke”
To these people, their political ideology is their religion
Absolutely agree. I am certain ifwe’re real and appeared in person and spouted half the stuff attributed to him in the gospel they would call him “woke” too.
Absolutely no doubt. Kind of surprised no one has done a video series where you anonomize Jesus’s teachings, then read them back to conservative Christians and ask what they think about them
The results would be hilarious, no doubt
Probably because they don’t want Tucker Carlson siccing a mob on them
The pope? They’ll drop Jesus Himself if it suits them
They already have. Been reports of congregations who have complained the the words of Jesus are too woke and weak…
does anyone know off the top of their head how/when Christianity became so tightly associated with the Republican party? No way it was always so extreme in US history
My favourite bumper sticker ever said: The moral majority is neither
Having lived though it in the 1990’s there was a marked turn in the politicizing of Christianity. There was a rise of mega churches and politicians who worked to make churches align to the Republican Party for government assistance. The money for what was welfare was shuffled to churches to take up services that once were secular.
The whole tenor of conversion changed. It just got mean and only got worse from there.
Interesting, I’m assuming that politicians who bought into this evangelical pandering benefited from this by getting votes/support?
They dropped the Jesus Christ of the New Testament half a century ago, and even then they pretended he was somehow as white as mayonnaise, so why not drop his earthly mouthpiece?
Honestly, I consider that a win. A huge reason I left the catholic faith wasn’t because of the religion itself, but because of the people who claimed to follow Jesus but in practice did nothing like Jesus.
yout are not wrong given survey data
Pope Francis is completely right.
I’d say he’s left
deleted by creator
To be fair that’s because Hitler lied about being the most catholic ever and by the time they realized who he really was Italy was in too deep.
Dude was actually going to ban Catholicism after awhile, had already made a banned religions list that was slowly working its way up.
Unsurprisingly Judaism was the first on this list, more surprisingly Ievoha’s Witness was the second.
deleted by creator
Pope Francis was 9 years old when WW2 ended, so get off your high horse.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Religion is the biggest scourge against humans. Controlling behavior, brainwashing the young and stolen untold trillions of $$. Fuck religion. They all need to be labeled as cults and treated as harshly.
Religion, at its core, is basically rules that state “don’t be a dick.” Unfortunately, all of the dicks didn’t get the message.
It’s not "don’t be a dick’.
It’s “do as we want you to do”
Plenty of the rules are “be a dick, like this:”
Plenty of the rules are “don’t do this objectively harmless thing”
Plenty of the rulez are “do this ridiculously pointless thing”
Yes, modern religion has many rules made by the dicks once they took over. Before the dicks rules were things like don’t steal shit, don’t fuck your neighbor’s wife, don’t murder people, don’t lie about shit, etc. The dicks were so bad that some other guy had to come along and say “seriously guys, stop being dicks”. But the dicks didn’t like that so they killed him.
Phallus 6:9 - And lo’ the Lord said unto Clitoris, “Be thou not a dick by thine actions, nor by thy words, nor by thy thoughts.”
Amen!
Plenty of the rules are “don’t do this objectively harmless thing”
Plenty of the rulez are “do this ridiculously pointless thing”
Most declarations of what religions do and don’t don’t do miss Discordianism pretty hard, but you got us on those.
Exhibits: A) Don’t eat hotdog buns. B) Go off alone on a Friday and eat a hotdog with a bun.
Good looking out for us religious minorities.
All of culture is “do as we want you to do.” We’re hierarchical animals.
Ish.
Many religions are more “don’t be a dick to your fellow brothers in faith, but feel free to be a dick to others”. In-group out-group dynamics were historically quite important.
You know - “don’t murder”, but at the same time Deuteronomy says
10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves.
Also
(19) “You are not to lend at interest to your brother, no matter whether the loan is of money, food or anything else that can earn interest. 21 (20) To an outsider you may lend at interest, but to your brother you are not to lend at interest, so that Adonai your God will prosper you in everything you set out to do in the land you are entering in order to take possession of it.
You know - “don’t murder”, but at the same time Deuteronomy says
If you take each verse at face value, this is a problem and what you imply is true.
But the thing you quoted from Deuteronomy were instructions to the Israelites. It’s recorded history, not instruction. You can’t just point to a verse in the Bible (like Acts 8:8 "Saul, for his part, approved of his murder") and say “see? The Bible says to do bad things!”
And going deeper shows that the Mosaic Law (the laws in the old testament, excluding the ten commandments), part of which is in your second block quote, was superceded by the Law Covenant when Jesus died. Again, it was a law directed specifically at Jews of the time.
You can kinda think of the first five Bible books (called the Torah in Judaism) as a speed run of history. So much happens in terms of time covered in those five books.
Not everyone who considers Deuteronomy to be scripture is Christian. For example, basically any rabbi would disagree with you.
The Deuteronomic code is literally presented as instruction from Moses to Israel as a normative set of rules for israel to follow. Many of the rules in it are included in the traditional lists of the Torah’s 613 commandments.
I don’t know of similar commandments in the new testament, but it’s had its fair share of religious leaders inciting sectarian wars, pogroms, persecution, etc. For example, Pope Paul IV wrote a decree that forced the Jews of Rome into a ghetto in 1555, prevented them from owning property or working most skilled jobs. The Spanish Inquisition primarily targeted Jews and Muslims who converted to Christianity under threat of exile.
any rabbi would disagree with you.
Have even met a single rabbi, no two rabbi’s agree on anything.
And going deeper shows that the Mosaic Law (the laws in the old testament, excluding the ten commandments), part of which is in your second block quote, was superceded by the Law Covenant when Jesus died. Again, it was a law directed specifically at Jews of the time.
While rabbis don’t agree on much, the official line of all the denominations is that messianic Jews are Christians, not Jews.
Every “rabbi” that accepts that the Torah was superceded by Jesus is a messianic Jew, basically by definition. That makes them not a rabbi, but a Christian minister in cosplay.
I don’t disagree with you entirely I was pointing out that using absolutes with Jews is fraught with contradictions. I wasn’t necessarily trying to support the person you responded to. Even within the framework that they were rules to follow there is an extremely wide variety of interpretation. And while I agree with your messianic assessment, as an atheist Jew that remember a tiny amount, I also think gatekeeping a religion is sketchy territory. Most fundamentalists don’t believe any other sect is truly part of their religion, hard to draw lines using the perspectives of people that have a clear in group mentality. To me, if you say you’re a Jew, you’re a Jew, I have no reason to challenge the claim.
Not everyone who considers Deuteronomy to be scripture is Christian. For example, basically any rabbi would disagree with you.
Sure, but this thread is mostly about Christianity (the post is about the Pope and the Catholic Church).
The Deuteronomic code is literally presented as instruction from Moses to Israel as a normative set of rules for israel to follow.
Yes. I said basically this. I wrote: But the thing you quoted from Deuteronomy were instructions to the Israelites.
I don’t know of similar commandments in the new testament
Because there aren’t any like that.
had its fair share of religious leaders inciting sectarian wars, pogroms, persecution, etc. For example, Pope Paul IV wrote a decree that forced the Jews of Rome into a ghetto in 1555, prevented them from owning property or working most skilled jobs. The Spanish Inquisition primarily targeted Jews and Muslims who converted to Christianity under threat of exile.
And? Your next door neighbour can be a “Christian”, go to church every week, etc, but then find out he’s a regular thief and had murdered someone. Would you then conclude there must be a commandment somewhere in the Bible that condones stealing and murder? Or would you conclude that he didn’t follow the principles of the Bible he proclaimed to believe in?
Examples of people doing bad things in the name of the Bible is not evidence of anything against the Bible. It’s just an example of terrible people being manipulative, exploitative, and ultimately evil. Many people throughout history (and many alive today) have realized that many people are more willing to listen to and accept what you say when you claim it’s from the Bible. These people don’t care about the Bible, they just care that it’s a tool they can use for manipulation.
Examples of people doing bad things in the name of the Bible is not evidence of anything against the Bible.
Christianity, and catholicism more specifically, are more than just the Bible itself.
Religious teachings evolve over time based off of new reinterpretations of old passages, teachings from influential leaders, folk traditions that spring up, etc. Those are all part of the religion, too.
For example, most Christians would say that the serpent in the garden of eden is Satan. Yet Genesis doesn’t say anything about that, and the New Testament doesn’t explicitly say it either. Mostly, it’s a folk tradition some people found a couple verses you could squint at to support it.
And particularly in the case of Catholicism, there’s a world of difference between a pope issuing an official bull, and your neighbor being a catholic who happens to be a shitty person. There’s a huge difference between a random person teaching to be nice to your neighbor but shitty to outsiders, and for St Jerome to do that.
Christianity, and catholicism more specifically, are more than just the Bible itself.
Catholicism yes. Christianity, no. Christianity is literally based on the Bible and a “Christian” is a follower of Christ (it’s actually what the word means).
most Christians would say that the serpent in the garden of eden is Satan. Yet Genesis doesn’t say anything about that, and the New Testament doesn’t explicitly say it either.
Well, that’s not exactly correct. It’s true that in Genesis it doesn’t say “the snake in the garden that spoke to Eve was Satan”. However, Satan is referred to as “the father of the lie” and “the original serpent”. Satan is the only one to directly challenge God’s right to rule and the lie to Eve was the first challenge. It has nothing to do with folk tradition. There are other supporting scriptions also.
And particularly in the case of Catholicism, there’s a world of difference between a pope issuing an official bull, and your neighbor being a catholic who happens to be a shitty person.
Yes, there is a difference in the sense that the Pope has a huge and wide reaching audience and the neighbour is mostly a nobody. But that doesn’t matter when we’re talking about their conduct as it relates to “doing the right thing according to God”. Each person is accountable to God for their own behaviour and actions.
On the other hand, there’s an argument to be had about whether or not Catholicism should even be considered Christian anymore. There are so many doctrines and teachings that aren’t in the Bible, or flat out taken from other “pagan” religions (religious syncretism). Sometimes even going against teachings in the Bible.
Reference:
John 8:44 “You are from your father the Devil, and you wish to do the desires of your father. That one was a murderer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of the lie.”
Revelation 12:9 “So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan”
And yet the golden rule usually doesn’t get written down until multiple generations after the religion is formed. Took almost a century for Christianity to bother.
The problem is “don’t be a dick” meant different things in different points in time. Now, enough time has elapsed that there are a huge amount of different iterations of “don’t be a dick” rules and people just pick and choose which rules suits them.
If you’re talking about all religions, I can’t speak to that. But if we’re talking about “Christians”, then that’s not the case. “Love your neighbour” and “Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you” are pretty hard to interpret “differently”. There’s no excuse.
It’s not about interpreting things differently and more about picking and choosing what to believe.
This is true also
When the rules are laws, lawyers argue in front of judges and define the grey areas. They change the grey areas from time to time. We as a society have agreed to have a single interpretation of those rules.
In religion, when people don’t agree on the rules or how they should be interpreted, they can break apart and form their own religion. There is no governing body with the power to enforce the single interpretation.
Thus, people who missed the dont be a dick memo just find each other and pretend their interpretation of the thousands of years old text is more valid than the don’t be a dick crowd.
Some dicks created religion.
“Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest”
We’re doing pretty good on the king front, lets work on the priests a bit
We’ve just changed the form of monarchal feudalism, it’s still very much alive. Just disguised as CEOs and Presidents in our present oligarchy. But they might as well be kings and queens. And an enormous amount of those people still manipulate religion as a means to holding on to power. We are a long way from strangling our last king or priest.
“Cult” is just something the big congregation calls the small congregation.
There’s a whole list of 8 points over what constitute a cult.
I don’t remember the whole thing, but it was something like : Cults don’t let you leave. If you do leave, your family and friends who are still in the cult will not speak to you. Cults control you in details. They make sure you are tired at the end of the day, too tired to think for yourself. Cults make you dependent financially. Once you are that deep in, leaving means starting over economically.
There’s more, but it is different from how most people experience mainstream religions (I mean there are pockets here and there that are very cultish, but really the religion as a whole is a different beast that just works differently than an actual cult).
Tell me more about how you’ve never been in a church in the south.
I’ve been to multiple churches in the south, like everywhere some are better some are worse.
I like the similar sentiment from a while back:
The messengers and the prophets will come to you and give you what belongs to you. You, in turn, give them what you have, and say to yourselves, ‘When will they come and take what belongs to them?’
- Jesus (but in a text buried in a jar for centuries after becoming punishable by death for just possessing it)
And yet a lot of people are still religious so if you’re running around suggesting destroying the thing they love and feel positive about you might find they are unwilling to listen to anything you have to say. Right now I really would rather we focus on collective action over the climate than worry about whose version of faith is correct.
------ian doomsday fantasy is one of the major drivers of climate change. They have always viewed the world as disposable, indeed, the sooner disposed the better.
What middle ground is there?
I reject that premise entirely.
Maybe anti-religious people need to make an effort to understand how to better communicate their views as frankly many cone across as the same as bigots do.
I dunno if it’s actually possible (for me) to be honest and communicate evenly with the faithful. I cannot see their beliefs as anything other than wishful thinking and fantasy.
Not to say the religious are stupid, i don’t believe in binary smart/stupid in most cases. I know some very intelligent religious folks who have what i consider at best a blind spot for their belief.
I frankly believe it to be impossible. Any discussion where one side has “faith” to fall back on and calls poking holes in religion as an attack on that faith is fated to fail before you start
Don’t talk about their faith then. Talk about what needs to be done and if a member of an Abrahamic faith asks why remind them it’s what God told Adam to do. Genesis makes it clear humanity is to tend the earth not exterminate all life on it.
Well that is a good point. I’m not well versed in the Bible however, and i would hesitate to quote it even if i were. how would it sound to someone faithful to have someone without, quoting their faith at them? It would further require my reading the Bible with the express purpose of busting their chops, which wouldn’t feel good to me.
It’s literally in the first book of Genesis. Takes about 4 minutes to read
Religion can fuel some truly abhorrent things, but at the same time I know people who have used religion and faith to pull themselves out of a really bad spot in life.
There can be a middle ground between admonishing all religious practices and dogmatic bible thumpers, and that starts with religion being a understood as a personal choice and how people interpret the religion being a reflection on their self and not the every religious person ever.
No. Religion is a scam. Lies to all it’s members. Steals from anyone that tithes or donates anything, including their time.
Calling religion the biggest scourge on humanity is a huge exageratrion. I’d probably say slavery is significantly worse, and human trafficking shows no signs of stopping. Capitalism is also clearly worse, and it’s the most impactful force today. A large reason religion, and specifically Christianity, has gotten worse in recent years is because of the influence of capitalism.
I’d elaborate a bit on my interpretation of what the fella said.
The religion in point - catholicism, and maybe we can generalize to all abrahamic religions, I’m not very familiar with other religions to speak of them, instill a way of thinking that doing wrong is all fine and well as long as you repent and ask for forgiveness. Sound sensible, right? Except we’re dealing with people here so they take it to mean that you can do all sorts of crap as long as you say you’re sorry. It got so bad at some point that the pope was selling indulgences. ‘Give me money and I’ll let you sin’.
They also instill a sort of moral superiority on the adherents to said religions versus the pagans.
So yeah, slavery is worse (and I’m counting human trafficking here as well - it’s the modern version), but is it not facilitated by the mindset instilled by religion? First - you see them as savages needing to be civilized - that’s the moral superiority talking - you enslave them, BUT you bring them to god as well, so there’s a load off your moral issues. Add to that the fact that even if you were wrong and did bad stuff, you didn’t ‘know’ any better, and it’s ok cause hellfire won’t get you because you repent, there’s your free ticket.
On the other hand, if you kidnap and force good christians into sexual slavery, you can be pretty sure that you most likely won’t get murdered / maimed while you’re raping because their moral teachings say to turn the other cheek instead of fighting back. And one of the 10 comandments is thou shalt not kill. Also a belief in sky-papa dishing out punishment in the afterlife makes people less inclined to seek vengeance (compounded with the previous point - thou shalt submit to being dehumanized by a fellow human without recourse).
This is an oversimplification to make a point, but sure, religion is seemingly not worse than other crap people are capable of but it sure sets the groundwork nicely. Sort of like you need to know a language before you can swear in it. A tool, but less like a hammer and more like a scythe. One good use, but so many other bad ones.
Same hydra, different heads.
What is the hydra in this situation? Is it just the concept of evil?
No. I’m correct.
Modern day religion. In the past your faith was quite important and dictated morals. It’s unfortunate it’s been so twisted over the years. And by past I’m not just saying the 50s, but even back in the 1500s.
Religion has sucked shit since it started & the first scam artist started stealing $ in the name of a fake “god”.
Everything has two sides to it. I think it was predominantly used more for good back in earlier civilizations, but I don’t think there’s a need for it today.
It’s much easier now in 2023 to be able to look back at how religion was used for thousands of years and criticize it. I’m an atheist myself and I think the necessity of religion was to learn from it and advanced society. Today I think we’re so advanced we no longer need it.
Religion has never been good.
What? Look, I’m an atheist myself by choice but I’ve seen religion fix up a homeless man and through “God” he was able to get himself back on his feet and reenter society. I think reddit/Lemmy has too big of a hate on religion, but in the outside world it’s still the majority dominated beliefs.
Plus you can’t overgeneralize “religion” as there’s about 4000 of them. Buddhism is pretty dope if you read into it. Regardless, I think we will see a shift into more atheists/agnostic people in the future though.
Religion is abhorrent no matter how you keep trying to paint it.
Yea I don’t think I’m changing your opinion here. I think everything has two sides to it. I’m of the opinion of just let people live their lives. Shoving atheism down everyone’s throat is equally as annoying as shoving religion. Remember that religion ≠ Christianity. The Greeks gods are also pretty cool in my opinion.
It’s just human nature to “worship” something. Whether it be materialism or idealism. As I see it, there couldn’t have been an early world without religion because humans are just that way.
Religion has always been a cancer on humanity. We don’t need an imaginary sky daddy for morals. We would have got there (and likely much quicker and much better) without religion.
I’m not religious myself, but “God” played a role in at least trying to comprehend the world before science. Whatever we didn’t know was “God” until we did know. I don’t think modern society needs it, but our concept and understanding of the world and universe is so broad now that we don’t.
It’s dangerous now to label whatever we don’t know as “God” but earlier in humanity I think it’s part of the reason why some (not all) laws and morals were established in the first place.
I have found this to be true. The current pope is doing a lot of work to bring Catholicism into the modern age. Starting with acknowledging and addressing in material ways the history of abuse.
There is going to be , or should be , a full on schism in the US church. The parishioners I practice with are more for the Republican Party than for the pope. They basically are waiting for him to die and ignoring doctrine that does not match ‘how it used to be’ Ya know with all of the sexual abuse and bigotry.
That schism happened with Vatican II. After that point, it seems like Popes have regularly been political instead of doing what they knew was right, because they seem to think slight improvement by the congregation is better than alienating the conservative membership. I think the growth Sedevacantism terrifies them more than anything. The group is clearly heretical by every Catholic doctrine, but so popular you will not see any formal declaration that they are in a state of excommunication.
The thing is, we non-Catholics should be rooting the religion on to shed that craziness. Whether you like religion or not, Catholicism is not going anywhere and a progressive Catholic Church is better than a Regressive Catholic Church.
There is going to be , or should be , a full on schism in the US church. The parishioners I practice with are more for the Republican Party than for the pope. They basically are waiting for him to die and ignoring doctrine that does not match ‘how it used to be’ Ya know with all of the sexual abuse and bigotry.
How many schisms would that make now? There was the Protestant schism, then the Anglican one, Eastern Orthodox one (I think?), and uhh…I’m sure there may be more but at any rate, I guess they certainly are due for another given it’s been awhile.
No Council of Nicaea fans?
Constantine: Ok guys, nobody leaves the room until we sort out this Holy Trinity thing you’re all killing each other over.
I still have no clue what’s up with the holy trinity tbh 🤨
I chalk it up to, “well, glad i’m not christian” and leave it at that as much as I can.
Well neither did Constantine. But people were killing each other over it, so… Council of Nicaea. From what I understand he didn’t really say anything in the Council, just sat there and let all the priests argue it out.
Basically the holy trinity is the idea that Jesus,God and the Holy Spirit are all aspects of the same being. They are not independent of each other.
In Lovecraftian terms the full extent of God is an eldritch being is so incomprehensible that it would break mortals if he appears directly to them. Jesus and the Holy spirit are two ways that god can interact with mortals without them, or the universe, breaking. They are not lesser separate gods .
I left catholocism shortly after getting my CS degree, but I think it works roughly like this:
class Trinity { private: God g; public: God& father = g; God& son = g; God& holy_spirit = g; };Edit: stupid Lemmy can’t render ampersands correctly: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/3774
Think of it how like the US gov is made up of the executive, judicial, and legislative branches but they’re all part of the government.
you can just smell the divinity
We’re not all that different. We just replaced religion with ideology, but it’s not all that different. Still killing each other over stupid shit and pretending it’s the righteous thing to do.
New Pope diss track just dropped.
Hey babe, wake up
The pope ain’t perfect. But goddamn do I love him stripping corrupt officials of their position, being much more chill towards my queer brothers and sisters worldwide, and telling the US arm to remove the giant sticks from their ass over abortion and divorce.
I hope he lives till 130 and keeps being a stabilizing force for good. It’s a rarity to see religious officials who are not only reasonable, but actively trying to make the world a slightly better place.
I don’t think a octogenarian virgin who believes in imaginary friends is the authority I’d nominate to lecture me on abortion and divorce.
He said allowing people to transition was as dangerous as nuclear weapons.
Yeah, wow, such love and support.
I’ve been pissed at him since the Charlie Hebdo situation, and even if I might agree with some of the things he says, fuck him.
I never heard of that so had to look it up. A bunch of Muslim fundamentalists in France got angry and killed people at a satirical magazine. Not sure how that’s the Pope’s fault.
He said that religions shouldn’t be mocked.
And as one of the biggest persons in one religion, it is important to say that about other religions. They are kind of the same, so it would be like mocking himself.
While I don’t agree with the statement that ideas shouldn’t be mocked, I get it.
Putting aside the fact that it’s basically victim blaming, he went further:
“If [a close friend] says a swear word against my mother, he’s going to get a punch in the nose”
What happened to “turning the other cheek”? Does that not count when someone makes the horrible crime that is satire on religion? Hypocrisy at its finest, no better way to describe it.
except he did this as a reaction to Catholics leaving in a manner that is basically HEMORRHAGING numbers.
This is adapt or die reaction, not adapt because it’s the right thing to do. Let them die.
You’re wrong. Pope Francis is the most liberal pope who’s ever existed and has pushed for human rights and decriminalization of the LGBTQ community.
Have you been listening???
In Slovakia, gay adoption AND marriage was on a referendum, and weirdly enough, Francis threw his support because against it. To “preserve the family”
- “Let’s think of the nuclear arms, of the possibility to annihilate in a few instants a very high number of human beings. Let’s think also of genetic manipulation, of the manipulation of life, or of the gender theory, that does not recognize the order of creation.”
So “kill a few million people with nukes” is the same as “gender theory”
- “The family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life.”
God loves you but you ain’t equal. Homosexuality is a sin, but not a crime. You are welcome in the Church, but you are also immoral and going to hell.
Sheesh, I was worrying a bit there. At least I’m not violating the laws of man.
The Church’s position in general is that everyone is immoral and going to hell without the Church’s help. (See original sin, the sacrament of confession, etc)
He isn’t saying “gay is now ok.” The pope is saying that the sin of homosexuality shouldn’t be treated any different than the sin of lying, greed, stealing, envy, cheating, murder, child molestation, etc.
I think the quote from him below expresses his viewpoint with more nuance than I could:
“The door is open to everyone, everyone has their own space in the church. How will each person live it? We help people live so that they can occupy that place with maturity, and this applies to all kinds of people.”
“What I don’t like at all, in general, is that we look at the so-called ‘sin of the flesh’ with a magnifying glass. If you exploited workers, if you lied or cheated, it didn’t matter, and instead relevant were the sins below the waist.”
“We must not be superficial and naive, forcing people into things and behaviors for which they are not yet mature, or are not capable. To accompany people spiritually and pastorally takes a lot of sensitivity and creativity.”
“Everyone, everyone, everyone, are called to live in the church. Never forget that.”
Great. Just let me know when all those homosexuals the Church is so accepting of are allowed to receive any sacraments.
You’re telling me the Pope is Catholic? That’s fuckin insane man. How weird!
Oh interesting, had not heard that. I don’t stay updated with the popes latest tbh.
Thanks!
Don’t buy it. He’s still a snake in a robe.
Not familiar with the situation, but looking it up, I see same sex marriage banned by the constitution, and an attempt at a referendum failed with low turnout. That doesn’t track with a religious figure riling up the conservatives.
I only have English speaking sources to go on, but the only Christian organizational involvement is see is against gender change surgery. Im not going to argue that, but it is also a lot narrower than your claim
“I greet the pilgrims from Slovakia and, through them, I wish to express my appreciation to the entire Slovak Church, encouraging everyone to continue their efforts in defense of the family, the vital cell of society,”
Seems pretty straightforward…
It’s not just that he’s the most progressive pope ever, but supposedly he was elected for exactly that reason. There’s a lot of inertia to change, like anywhere else, but enough of the leadership recognized where they wanted to go, enough to elect him
first Jesus, now the pope is woke? At what point do I start considering that maybe I’m actually the asshole here?
AITA allowing a person with mental illness claiming to be god be put to death?
I’ve (30M) been reflecting on a past decision I made and I could really use some outside perspective. There was this significant event involving a certain crucifixion, and I had a role to play in it. At the time, I was faced with a lot of conflicting pressures and I ended up not doing much to prevent it.
Looking back, I’m starting to wonder if I made the wrong call. I know hindsight is 20/20, but I can’t shake the feeling that I should’ve done more to change the outcome.
What do you think? Was I in the wrong for not taking a stronger stand against what happened, considering the circumstances? Your honest opinions would be greatly appreciated! 🤷♂️🙏
I think most of them just don’t want to do that.
This is the fruits of the GOP strategy that’s been going on for decades to strengthen their support through Christian believers. The Pope is just recognizing the impact of that from the religious side, whereas Barry Goldwater warned of it’s impact from the political side.
Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they’re sure trying to do so, it’s going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can’t and won’t compromise. I know, I’ve tried to deal with them.
It certainly is a terrible damn problem, and we’re knee deep in the shit right now.
Separation of Church and State: Good for the Church, Good for the State.
Pot meet kettle
Ironic… he could see the problems in others… But not himself.
Being called “backwards” by the head of the catholic church is quite something
Pretty sure it was a Roman Catholic priest that burned all the Mayan texts. The Roman Catholic Church is the largest destroyer and oppressor that ever existed.
Pope is 100% correct on this one. But on terrorist state ruzzia, he misses the mark by a mile https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qirI4eSTNag
Pope Francis has blasted the “backwardness” of some conservatives
Media needs to find another word for speaking up in opposition to something.
Commenter SLAMS media over use of word “blasted”.
It’s organized crime and mob taking over America. And they are already in…
I mean their leader is charged with racketeering, so yeah, it’s an organized crime outfit.
I doubt Trump is the leader. There’s bigger people pulling strings. Trump’s a pawn with a debt.
Well yeah, that would be Putin. But things are a bit fucky for him right now too, so Trump is kinda on his own.
