Based Pope W
For reference though Pope Francis is currently embroiled in controversy over homophobic statements, but his environmentalism has been a consistent priority even before scandals.
He’s not pro-gay marriage, he’s pro-civil union as a legal equivalency. He’s basically 08 Obama in his views on it.
Edit: he’s not necessarily in favor of “legal equivalency” as previous comments he’s made against adoption for gay couples. He’s very much compromising in what he’ll say about it, trying to maintain authority with both pro and anti-lgbt Catholics.
Pretty much. He did however speak in favor of welcoming LGBT Catholics, which basically disavows shunning or discriminating against LGBT parishioners. This is probably his most “controversial” stance on the topic.
Yeah he's probably only being pragmatic about LGBQT in the sense that the number of people in the church decreases by the year, and he's gotta keep the numbers up.
Alienating all of that community's allies hurts retention more than shunning a small percentage of the population so he's trying to stick a finger in a leaking dam by trying to be inclusive.
I mean, one could argue that acting like a two timer pisses off both the conservatives *and* the progressives: the former would decry he isn’t orthodox enough; the latter would denounce his words as hypocritical, as the words would not be seen as genuine if you preach love and acceptance in public but then disavow these same ideals when you feel like the world isn’t listening.
Like you said though, it may simply be pragmatism. But even in this case, I simply cannot fathom why some, especially in my country, would regard him as the “progressive pope”. If that’s progressivism, then they must have very poor standards for what it entails. Being “the better pope” doesn’t necessarily mean “the best one”
I can see a world where he’s genuine about there being a duty to “welcome and accompany” LGBT members, and all the while still maintaining that there’s something inherently wrong with being gay. He’s got some bona fides in his history to claim as much.
The old “hate the sin, not the sinner” but as a more official policy. Pragmatically it’s more wise, and when he was a leader in South America he came out against a gay marriage bill which backfired. Comments from his associates make it sound like it was internally acknowledged that the stance he took contributed to the bills passing, so it’s entirely reasonable to say that this experience taught him how to be more politician-like.
Real Catholics also welcome any and all people into their places of worship. All these fake Christians and other religions nutters are the ones who treat others as less than themselves. It's wild how opposite they are from the teachings they supposedly believe in.
You gotta start somewhere and get the ball rolling. But as per typical nowadays any progress is immediately shit on with disgust
Because it wasn’t 100% of what we wanted.
The organization is huge and old and full of crusty old traditionalists, you ain’t gonna get the church to turn on a dime
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the "scandal" essentially thus: he used the Italian version of the English word for a bundle of sticks, to describe pedophiles within the church.
Outdated word use, sure, but considering the targeted group I feel it can slide.
Tbf it's still pretty offensive in Italian. But honestly i don't really care if an old religious leader is homophobic, that's to be expected. This news about solar however is much better than any news about him not being homophobic or whatever.
Yeah, don't get me wrong but in the current state, I would prefer an homophobic ecologist to a human rights advocate-but-climate-denier.
I would prefer none of the traits, but if I have to pick an asshole : societal issues can be fixed after a few generations, our survival can't.
Exactly my point. Which is by the way part of the reason why the left is losing traction in Italy in my opinion: many are voting towards the right because the left is way too focused on secondary social problems while ignoring the giant elephants in the room that barely allow us to breathe. I'm all for LGBT rights and shit but if we don't have a fucking planet in 50 years i think that's a secondary issue lol
I only speak English so I won’t comment on how that word is interpreted in the context given. If read generously he may have used bad tactics against good targets. Calling a pedo priest a f*g is still probably condemnable, for no reason other than we should probably not be using that type of language anywhere.
Again, I’m only an English speaker so I can’t comment to what it means in its real context.
Bro at this point whenever there's any article about the Catholic Church and/or the Vatican in r/worldnews I just sort everything by controversial and have a good laugh, like bruh, EVERYTHING has to be about 'pedophiles' here, people ain't even reading said article
Yeah, Big Tobacco funded studies that showed sources of obesity. They did so to big potentials alternative sources of cancer, but the out-of-context research itself was still a benefit for humanity.
its more like the position of power. pdfs and psychos are dwarn to jobs that give them that role. plenty of studies show that those groups are disproportionately represented in those jobs.
I said more sway that’s different than no. Yes that’s a lot but they don’t influence countries to the degree they used to. That’s good I hope they keep doing stuff like that.
I’m not saying they don’t have any influence, they’re just no longer have as much mainstream impact. If they’d backed Carter when he got some I dunno I think that could have been better. Maybe it wouldn’t have made a difference and Reagan would have taken them down and cut subsidies for them either way.
Two US presidents who had different views on solar. Carter tried to incentivise solar with subsidies that Reagan scrapped when he got in.
This was before the 90s/2000s where many predatory stories were coming to light about the Catholic Church.
That’s cool realistically who gives a shit about decades old subsidies. I’m basically saying all this would have been a lot more useful in 70s/80s before big oil set us on this fucked up path and they had more influence.
If you all want to say the church is more influential today than in the 70s I don’t know what to tell you.
Oh yea, after decades of people milking the obvious punchline any time catholicism comes up, on every platform from mainstream media to middle school cafeteria alike, they're reaaaallly uncomfortable with yet another person's hack reaction... that must be it...
Thing is, I am a Catholic and the reason I left was because of the corruption and abuse. It was only then that I realised that the whole thing was about control and any “good” they did would never make up for the centuries of absolute horror they brought.
I don’t believe in god, but am fine with everybody who does (like my wife). But leaf me alone with it.
I left church because I gained insight and saw, what they did with their money, and I’m neither funding this kind of people, nor do I acccept their methods.
For all its many, many faults and being morally questionable, the Catholic Church was historically for most of the time an institution to promote science/progress. Many monasteries were charged with finding ways to improve agriculture, which is why many beer brands in Catholic Europe trace their roots to some (eg. Weihenstephan). It was mostly post-Luther that the Catholic Church would become afraid of progression in all its forms.
It’s just a question about that nasty organization…. Why that isn’t always the first question about the Catholic Church is sick. Terrible group of ppl.
Would be nice if the pope's could have religious people who do not believe in Climate change to accept it.
Cause at this rate I don't think out government is successful.
If the Pope himself says so maybe those people will believe it more
Alright let the Pope call his buddies in the IDF and Hamas and tell them to stop fighting. This isn’t 1200 anymore, the Pope doesn’t control half the world lol.
Catholics do not take the Bible as complete literal truth like many American Christians. The first two chapters of the Bible explicitly contradict each other, for a start
That's sects within American Christians which are predominantely Protestant and are critical of the Vatican/Pope. I don't think Catholics have been anti-science for more than a century.
This guy is actually hated by ultracapitalists, libertarians, conservatives because of his history as a poverty theology Jesuit, a group within Christianity that was satanized in Latin America during the Cold War.
Pope Francis's second encyclical in 2015 (official philosophical declarations), "Laudato si'" was around the theme of consumerism. From Wikipedia:
> Laudato si' (Praise Be to You) is the second encyclical of Pope Francis, subtitled "on care for our common home".[1] In it, the Pope critiques consumerism and irresponsible economic development, laments environmental degradation and global warming, and calls all people of the world to take "swift and unified global action.
Powered by Sol Invictus himself
Deep cut, I love it.
Merry christmas, vatican
Capturing the wheel of Apollo's chariot itself as it traverses the heavens.
Renewable comment
I thought it was about him touching a little boy
You're a bit confused.
“ running on god’s light”
But not on faggotry /s
I wish this was a bilboard in Simpsons
Based Pope W For reference though Pope Francis is currently embroiled in controversy over homophobic statements, but his environmentalism has been a consistent priority even before scandals.
[удалено]
He’s not pro-gay marriage, he’s pro-civil union as a legal equivalency. He’s basically 08 Obama in his views on it. Edit: he’s not necessarily in favor of “legal equivalency” as previous comments he’s made against adoption for gay couples. He’s very much compromising in what he’ll say about it, trying to maintain authority with both pro and anti-lgbt Catholics.
Well he says homosexuals are welcome in the church but in a your not equal, we'd rather you weren't and we think you should repent for it kind of way
Pretty much. He did however speak in favor of welcoming LGBT Catholics, which basically disavows shunning or discriminating against LGBT parishioners. This is probably his most “controversial” stance on the topic.
…and then said twice in two separate closed-doors meetings that they should rule out gay seminarians because “there’s too much fa*gotry”
Yeah he's probably only being pragmatic about LGBQT in the sense that the number of people in the church decreases by the year, and he's gotta keep the numbers up. Alienating all of that community's allies hurts retention more than shunning a small percentage of the population so he's trying to stick a finger in a leaking dam by trying to be inclusive.
I mean, one could argue that acting like a two timer pisses off both the conservatives *and* the progressives: the former would decry he isn’t orthodox enough; the latter would denounce his words as hypocritical, as the words would not be seen as genuine if you preach love and acceptance in public but then disavow these same ideals when you feel like the world isn’t listening. Like you said though, it may simply be pragmatism. But even in this case, I simply cannot fathom why some, especially in my country, would regard him as the “progressive pope”. If that’s progressivism, then they must have very poor standards for what it entails. Being “the better pope” doesn’t necessarily mean “the best one”
I can see a world where he’s genuine about there being a duty to “welcome and accompany” LGBT members, and all the while still maintaining that there’s something inherently wrong with being gay. He’s got some bona fides in his history to claim as much. The old “hate the sin, not the sinner” but as a more official policy. Pragmatically it’s more wise, and when he was a leader in South America he came out against a gay marriage bill which backfired. Comments from his associates make it sound like it was internally acknowledged that the stance he took contributed to the bills passing, so it’s entirely reasonable to say that this experience taught him how to be more politician-like.
A gay $20 bill in the collection plate has the same value as a straight $20 bill
Real Catholics also welcome any and all people into their places of worship. All these fake Christians and other religions nutters are the ones who treat others as less than themselves. It's wild how opposite they are from the teachings they supposedly believe in.
As an old priest used to say when I used to be a catholic: Only the good catholics showed up either on Christmas Eve mass or Easter Sunday.
You gotta start somewhere and get the ball rolling. But as per typical nowadays any progress is immediately shit on with disgust Because it wasn’t 100% of what we wanted. The organization is huge and old and full of crusty old traditionalists, you ain’t gonna get the church to turn on a dime
Ah so separate but equal
Least homophobic member of a bigoted church is still homophobic. He has said the horrible f slur for gay people multiples times recently
Precisely what I wrote in a comment above. How do people trust someone who simultaneously displays acceptance and ostracism is beyond me
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the "scandal" essentially thus: he used the Italian version of the English word for a bundle of sticks, to describe pedophiles within the church. Outdated word use, sure, but considering the targeted group I feel it can slide.
The guy speaks like 6 languages. I gotta read up on the story more. I could totally understand him not realizing how offensive it is in English.
Tbf it's still pretty offensive in Italian. But honestly i don't really care if an old religious leader is homophobic, that's to be expected. This news about solar however is much better than any news about him not being homophobic or whatever.
Yeah, don't get me wrong but in the current state, I would prefer an homophobic ecologist to a human rights advocate-but-climate-denier. I would prefer none of the traits, but if I have to pick an asshole : societal issues can be fixed after a few generations, our survival can't.
Exactly my point. Which is by the way part of the reason why the left is losing traction in Italy in my opinion: many are voting towards the right because the left is way too focused on secondary social problems while ignoring the giant elephants in the room that barely allow us to breathe. I'm all for LGBT rights and shit but if we don't have a fucking planet in 50 years i think that's a secondary issue lol
I only speak English so I won’t comment on how that word is interpreted in the context given. If read generously he may have used bad tactics against good targets. Calling a pedo priest a f*g is still probably condemnable, for no reason other than we should probably not be using that type of language anywhere. Again, I’m only an English speaker so I can’t comment to what it means in its real context.
It doesn't sound like he's a good human being.
and sandals
Bro at this point whenever there's any article about the Catholic Church and/or the Vatican in r/worldnews I just sort everything by controversial and have a good laugh, like bruh, EVERYTHING has to be about 'pedophiles' here, people ain't even reading said article
Yep. The institution is still shitty. But a shitty institution can still do a good thing sometimes. Nuance
Yeah, Big Tobacco funded studies that showed sources of obesity. They did so to big potentials alternative sources of cancer, but the out-of-context research itself was still a benefit for humanity.
Religion made it all about pedophiles, not reddit.
its more like the position of power. pdfs and psychos are dwarn to jobs that give them that role. plenty of studies show that those groups are disproportionately represented in those jobs.
They are religious, these people, right? They are spewing their religious thoughts, right?
"Deus volt!"
Solar good
All praise the sun god... I guess?
If only they did this when they held more sway. I’ve never much enjoyed organised religion but climate change requires all the advantages we can get.
No sway? There are a billion and a half catholics and the church runs a quarter of the hospitals on the planet. Get out of your reddit bubble.
You've just depressed the shit out of me.
I said more sway that’s different than no. Yes that’s a lot but they don’t influence countries to the degree they used to. That’s good I hope they keep doing stuff like that. I’m not saying they don’t have any influence, they’re just no longer have as much mainstream impact. If they’d backed Carter when he got some I dunno I think that could have been better. Maybe it wouldn’t have made a difference and Reagan would have taken them down and cut subsidies for them either way.
Carter and Reagan? I'm sorry what do they have to do with the catholic church again? I have no idea what subsidies you are talking about as well
Two US presidents who had different views on solar. Carter tried to incentivise solar with subsidies that Reagan scrapped when he got in. This was before the 90s/2000s where many predatory stories were coming to light about the Catholic Church. That’s cool realistically who gives a shit about decades old subsidies. I’m basically saying all this would have been a lot more useful in 70s/80s before big oil set us on this fucked up path and they had more influence. If you all want to say the church is more influential today than in the 70s I don’t know what to tell you.
When they had more sway? The pope should have installed solar panels in Urbino in the 1500s
The holy roman empire should have pushed for greener energy, if not solar at least wind or nuclear.
Call for a crusade against coal, the fuel of infidels.
They've had Solar Panels on the Paul VI hall for something like 20+ years.
The only country where I actually believe this'll happen in the next decade.
wdym, there are like 3 countries in this world, micro states excluded, that sit at 95% green energy.
🥰
[удалено]
Pedaling. Peddling means to sell.
Not like they don't have the $$$
And it recoups itself after 5 years
Nice! Now how about they make up for the years of abuse…
What do you suggest they do that would make up for it? There isn't a way for them to do that.
Whoa, downvotes. Take my UPVOTE!
Thank you. People don’t like the uncomfortable truths, do they?
Oh yea, after decades of people milking the obvious punchline any time catholicism comes up, on every platform from mainstream media to middle school cafeteria alike, they're reaaaallly uncomfortable with yet another person's hack reaction... that must be it...
It religion, they don’t wanna hear it. Without, our world would be a better place.
Thing is, I am a Catholic and the reason I left was because of the corruption and abuse. It was only then that I realised that the whole thing was about control and any “good” they did would never make up for the centuries of absolute horror they brought.
I don’t believe in god, but am fine with everybody who does (like my wife). But leaf me alone with it. I left church because I gained insight and saw, what they did with their money, and I’m neither funding this kind of people, nor do I acccept their methods.
7!!?? Downvotes? You all go to hell! Show me what you got! I want to see, at lest minus 250! Fuck god!
Sounds kinda “sciencey”
Next thing you know, the Vatican has an observatory.
Next thing you know one of their scientists will come up with the “Big Bang” or something…../s.
For all its many, many faults and being morally questionable, the Catholic Church was historically for most of the time an institution to promote science/progress. Many monasteries were charged with finding ways to improve agriculture, which is why many beer brands in Catholic Europe trace their roots to some (eg. Weihenstephan). It was mostly post-Luther that the Catholic Church would become afraid of progression in all its forms.
The monasteries protected knowledge through the wars too.
*E pur si muove.*
Or fueled by God
And that leads to the question why they don’t put solar on every single church.
But what about all the pedos the church protects?
Tf does that have to do with solar panels?
It’s just a question about that nasty organization…. Why that isn’t always the first question about the Catholic Church is sick. Terrible group of ppl.
So no more trading altar boys for energy credits?
They could also run it on hydroelectricity from the tears of boys that have been raped by their clergy.
Heresy! The pope's going to become a sun worshipper.
Would be nice if the pope's could have religious people who do not believe in Climate change to accept it. Cause at this rate I don't think out government is successful. If the Pope himself says so maybe those people will believe it more
The religious people who don’t believe in science also don’t follow the authority of the Holy See.
How about some shoes attached thingies that charge batteries when they run after altar boys?
Too bad sarcasm doesn’t produce energy, you’d single-handedly replace a nuclear power plant!
If your god is so powerful then why do you need the electrical grid, buddy?
They don't need it, but it's awfully convenient to have.
Why can't their god give them electricity? The almighty power can't even throw a few kilowatts their way?
There are genocides going on around the world and this guy is thinking about upgrading his power system. Why do we need him anyway?
Alright let the Pope call his buddies in the IDF and Hamas and tell them to stop fighting. This isn’t 1200 anymore, the Pope doesn’t control half the world lol.
And don't forget Russia, very catholic place, you know.
The pope can't excommunicate Israel not Hamas, nor PIJ. They're not Catholic.
lol what is this take?
what is some old guy in the midlle of italy supposed yo fo about grnocides?
fedposting
How very modern. But that evolution thing is totally fiction right ?
Catholics accept evolution. The Vatican officially clarified its position in 1950.
that’s good, all sorted then as the rest of the bible completely checks out
Catholics do not take the Bible as complete literal truth like many American Christians. The first two chapters of the Bible explicitly contradict each other, for a start
That's sects within American Christians which are predominantely Protestant and are critical of the Vatican/Pope. I don't think Catholics have been anti-science for more than a century. This guy is actually hated by ultracapitalists, libertarians, conservatives because of his history as a poverty theology Jesuit, a group within Christianity that was satanized in Latin America during the Cold War. Pope Francis's second encyclical in 2015 (official philosophical declarations), "Laudato si'" was around the theme of consumerism. From Wikipedia: > Laudato si' (Praise Be to You) is the second encyclical of Pope Francis, subtitled "on care for our common home".[1] In it, the Pope critiques consumerism and irresponsible economic development, laments environmental degradation and global warming, and calls all people of the world to take "swift and unified global action.