EU Pope Francis is dead - GOOD. FUCKING. RIDDANCE.

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Article || Archive

Francis became pope in 2013. In recent years, the 88-year-old was forced to cancel some events, sometimes at the last minute, because of his health.

Pope Francis has died at the age of 88, the Vatican has announced.
The pontiff, who was Bishop of Rome and head of the Catholic Church, became pope in 2013 after his predecessor Benedict XVI resigned.
In recent years, his papacy had been marked by several hospital visits and concerns about his health.
On 14 February, the Pope was admitted to hospital for bronchitis treatment.
In the days that followed, the Vatican said he had been diagnosed with bilateral pneumonia and that he had blood transfusions after tests revealed he had low levels of platelets in his blood, which is associated with anaemia.
On 22 February, it said the Pope was in a critical condition after a "prolonged respiratory crisis" that required a high flow of oxygen, and the next day the Vatican said Francis was showing an "initial, mild" kidney failure.
In the following days, thousands of faithful gathered in St Peter's Square to pray for his recovery, as others went to the Rome hospital where he was staying to leave flowers and cards.
He remained in hospital for the rest of the month, with doctors saying that his condition remained "complex".
On 6 March, his voice was heard for the first time since being admitted to hospital in an audio message, in which he thanked well-wishers, before adding: "I am with you from here."
On Sunday, he greeted crowds at the Easter Sunday Service.
His 38-day hospital stay ended on 23 March when he made his first public appearance in five weeks on a balcony at Gemelli where he smiled and gave a thumbs up to the crowds gathered outside.
He returned to the Vatican, making a surprise stop at his favourite basilica on the way home, before beginning two months of prescribed rest and recovery.
Doctors said Francis would have access to supplemental oxygen and 24-hour medical care as needed - adding that while the pneumonia infection had been successfully treated, the pontiff would continue to take oral medication for quite some time to treat the fungal infection in his lungs and continue his respiratory and physical physiotherapy.

'People's Pope'
Born in 1936, Francis was the first pope from South America. His papacy was marked by his championing of those escaping war and hunger, as well as those in poverty, earning him the moniker the "People's Pope".
In 2016, he washed the feet of refugees from different religions at an asylum centre outside Rome in a "gesture of humility and service".
He also made his views known on a wide range of issues, from climate change to wealth inequality and the role of women in the Catholic Church.
His acceptance of the LGBTQ community was unprecedented - beginning with an unexpected remark to reporters on a flight back from Brazil about gay clergy.
He said: "If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge them?"
However, in April 2024 he appeared to reiterate the Vatican's staunch opposition to gender reassignment, surrogacy, abortion and euthanasia, by signing the text "Dignitas Infinita" (Infinite Dignity).
In the same year, his own liberal credentials were questioned after reports he used a homophobic slur behind closed doors.
Pope's health in recent years
As a young man in his native Argentina, Francis had part of one lung removed.
In the last few years of his life, Francis needed a wheelchair or a cane to get around and limited his public speaking while struggling with bronchitis and flu.
Francis first spent time in hospital as pope in 2021 for an operation to remove part of his colon.
In June 2023 he was admitted to hospital for an operation on his intestine. At the time, the Vatican said he had been suffering "recurrent, painful and worsening" symptoms caused by an abdominal hernia.
His recent health issues meant he was forced to miss significant events in the Roman Catholic calendar, including the traditional Good Friday procession at Rome's Colosseum last year.
In 2022, he hinted he might step down if his health deteriorated after he was pictured using a wheelchair due to mobility issues caused by a flare-up of sciatica - a nerve condition that causes leg pain.
His predecessor, the late Benedict XVI, became the first pope to resign in more than 600 years in 2013 instead of serving for life, and died in 2022.
The Pope's original name was Jorge Mario Bergoglio and he previously served as a bishop in Buenos Aires.
An estimated 1.4 billion Catholics across the world will mourn Francis' passing.
 
I don't consider myself a "progressive" or a "trad" I'm just a Catholic. What I find interesting is that those who identify as "trad" tend to be the ones who both question the authority of the Church and also want to bring back Crusades and Inquisitions. What is "trad" about being disobedient to the Holy See? Why is "progressive" being used as slander against those of us who respect the authority of the Church and follow the teachings of Christ? There are actual progressives out there you could be attacking, the kind of people who are trying to twist Christ's teachings of love and forgiveness into acceptance of sin, but it seems to me that both of these groups want to change the faith to suit themselves, rather than change themselves to suit the faith. In that way the progressives and the trads have a lot of common ground.
Its probably speaks to the exact same distrust in institutions that is plaguing the western world right now. People don't even trust the institutions of the Church, be it the Catholic or otherwise. Part of this is the pernicious influence of Liberalism more generally, which has been fiendishly good at coopting institutions for its own purposes in order to push things like "the gay agenda" and wat not.

With respect to Catholicism specifically, the mandate of unmarried clergy has made it incredibly susceptible to homosexuals and sexual deviants. There really is no point in beating around the bush on this point. The Kind of people willing to become clergy are the people willing to forego family and meaningful intimate relationships with a wife. This pretty much filters out 90% of the layity from the jump. And of the 10% that remain willing to to go through, I guarantee only 1-2% are totally "Without Sin" as it were.

No I have no stats to back it up, but my source is it makes sense to me. You don't have the priest molestation scandals in denominations where the priests are allowed to have wives.

I'm reminded of a documentary I recently watched about the Pontifical Swiss Guard. A rather interesting aside in the documentary is when they are asked if they are required to be celibate. To which all the young men laughed "Oh no, we are guards, we are soldiers!".

There isn't even really a religious or doctrinal reason for the celibate priesthood. It was done because in the middle ages the children of Bishops of Priests started inheriting their fathers positions in the church and this was a threat to the Popes authority. So he just flat banned them from having legitimate children.
 
I understand where you're coming from. Faggots and troons are contemptible and it is very tempting to take faith and use it as a cudgel against them while feeling justified in your hatred. If that's what you want out of a religion why not consider Islam instead?

The only thing Christ taught us to hate is sin itself, not the sinner and not even our enemies. Ah but that's hard isn't it? It's so much easier to embrace hatred.

I don't consider myself a "progressive" or a "trad" I'm just a Catholic. What I find interesting is that those who identify as "trad" tend to be the ones who both question the authority of the Church and also want to bring back Crusades and Inquisitions. What is "trad" about being disobedient to the Holy See? Why is "progressive" being used as slander against those of us who respect the authority of the Church and follow the teachings of Christ? There are actual progressives out there you could be attacking, the kind of people who are trying to twist Christ's teachings of love and forgiveness into acceptance of sin, but it seems to me that both of these groups want to change the faith to suit themselves, rather than change themselves to suit the faith. In that way the progressives and the trads have a lot of common ground.
Progressives are much like Jews in that they seethe in impotent fury when they are correctly identified for what they are. You've already shown your hand, Mr. "Preacher", and I don't really care what kind of justifications you come up with afterwards. At best you're a buffet Christian who ignores the inconvenient parts of scripture that challenge your progressive worldview, and at worst you're an out and out heretic. In either case, what you bring is honeyed poison.

Again, with people like you acting as representatives of Christians and stewards of the faith, particularly Catholics, it is no wonder the religion is a laughing stock and dying out. You should find it a worrying sign that the only people heaping praise on you for your views, and the views of the late Pope Francis, are heretics that hate your faith and religion.
 
@Preacher ✝ Because I cannot reply to you, I will posit this: first of all, quit reading “trad” blogs or X or whatever. I did a long time ago. They’re not representative of the diversity of traditional Catholicism.

No one is questioning the Holy See. There’s a genuine investigative movement that questions hyperpapalism/ultramontanism. It’s not a surprise that they’re Catholics that embrace the totality of tradition, and have Eastern Catholic ties or Orthodox sympathies.

St. Paul called out St. Peter at the Council of Jerusalem. That was our first pope. If Peter isn’t exempt, no one is. There’s also the irony of embracing the laity‘s role in the Church, which we believe V2 got right - but then Pope Francis and the bishops, by and large, treat Catholics with a heavy clericalist hand, with vitriol.

All we want is a return to - and brighter blossoming of - the Pax Liturgica that Benedict XVI started. And because lex orandi = lex credendi, perhaps we can get the majority of Catholics to believe in the Real Presence again!
 
Look I'm not going to be mean but he was the guy running the organization that brought - with government USAID moneyed assistance - millions of illegals into the U.S. under the auspices of faux-Christian horseshit.

So just remember that. Millions of illegals are in the U.S. because of this guy, and yes, being the leader of an organization means you are responsible for its outcomes.
You should find it a worrying sign that the only people heaping praise on you for your views, and the views of the late Pope Francis, are heretics that hate your faith and religion.
The Catholic church's most notable contribution to the world in the third decade of the twenty first century of the Year of Our Lord, is bringing millions of thieves rapists murderers and drug dealers to the greatest country in the world's interior, using government funding from said country to do so, in the name of... God, somehow.

Yeah...
 
At best you're a buffet Christian who ignores the inconvenient parts of scripture that challenge your progressive worldview, and at worst you're an out and out heretic.
I challenge you to show me what parts of scripture I am ignoring here, make sure you use a real Bible and not a KJV.

Again, with people like you acting as representatives of Christians and stewards of the faith, particularly Catholics, it is no wonder the religion is a laughing stock and dying out.
Oh wait, I see now. You're attacking me because you hate Catholicism.

@Preacher ✝ Because I cannot reply to you, I will posit this: first of all, quit reading “trad” blogs or X or whatever. I did a long time ago. They’re not representative of the diversity of traditional Catholicism.

No one is questioning the Holy See. There’s a genuine investigative movement that questions hyperpapalism/ultramontanism. It’s not a surprise that they’re Catholics that embrace the totality of tradition, and have Eastern Catholic ties or Orthodox sympathies.

St. Paul called out St. Peter at the Council of Jerusalem. That was our first pope. If Peter isn’t exempt, no one is. There’s also the irony of embracing the laity‘s role in the Church, which we believe V2 got right - but then Pope Francis and the bishops, by and large, treat Catholics with a heavy clericalist hand, with vitriol.

All we want is a return to - and brighter blossoming of - the Pax Liturgica that Benedict XVI started. And because lex orandi = lex credendi, perhaps we can get the majority of Catholics to believe in the Real Presence again!
The way I see it, what you're describing does not need the "traditional" label. It's just Catholicism. By embracing the label you bring the implication that Catholicism is not inherently traditional, and lump yourself in with the "radtrads" or worse the sedes.

People seem to be getting the idea that I was a big fan of Francis and agreed with all his opinions. That is not the case. I simply try to temper my criticism of him in line with Canon Law 1373, and especially now that he has passed. I just don't like to see all this egregious grave dancing going on, especially when so much of it is rooted in misconception.

As far as increasing belief in the Real Presence again, I agree completely and I genuinely wonder why the Church isn't doing more to spread the word about Contemporary Eucharistic Miracles like the ones covered in the attached document. It's very compelling.
 

Attachments

Faggots and troons are contemptible and it is very tempting to take faith and use it as a cudgel against them while feeling justified in your hatred. If that's what you want out of a religion why not consider Islam instead?
The Church is not a safe place for children.

Objecting to trannies, fags, and rapefugees is a form of safeguarding. Congregations are not okay with allowing their most vulnerable to be violated and corrupted. People are begging the Church to be reasonable, to set limits and honor their obligation to protect the faithful.

I have no doubt that if I got gangraped by a pack of migrants, my priest would demand that I not press charges. You have no idea how bad it is.
 
The Church is not a safe place for children.

Objecting to trannies, fags, and rapefugees is a form of safeguarding. Congregations are not okay with allowing their most vulnerable to be violated and corrupted. People are begging the Church to be reasonable, to set limits and honor their obligation to protect the faithful.

I have no doubt that if I got gangraped by a pack of migrants, my priest would demand that I not press charges. You have no idea how bad it is.
Are you in Europe? To me this sounds like a very European problem that has infected the Church in Europe specifically rather than a problem with the Church as a whole. The Church in Europe has had a lot of issues in recent history and one of the biggest issues I had with Francis was him not doing enough to reign them in.
 
Look I'm not going to be mean but he was the guy running the organization that brought - with government USAID moneyed assistance - millions of illegals into the U.S. under the auspices of faux-Christian horseshit.

So just remember that. Millions of illegals are in the U.S. because of this guy, and yes, being the leader of an organization means you are responsible for its outcomes.

The Catholic church's most notable contribution to the world in the third decade of the twenty first century of the Year of Our Lord, is bringing millions of thieves rapists murderers and drug dealers to the greatest country in the world's interior, using government funding from said country to do so, in the name of... God, somehow.

Yeah...
I was also trying not to be mean, but frankly, there are few things I hate than people who masquerade as holy men while actively enabling and endorsing evil. It's utterly abhorrent, and it turns my stomach seeing so many people buy this, especially the idiot who whined about religious LARPers when this guy is such a LARPer that he even named himself as his character.
I challenge you to show me what parts of scripture I am ignoring here, make sure you use a real Bible and not a KJV.
Oh wait, I see now. You're attacking me because you hate Catholicism.
There is no point getting in a theological debate with you, because this has nothing to do with theology at its core level. The late Pope Francis supported the invasion of violent, predatory brown people to prey on whites, endorsed and enabled sexual degenerates that prey on children, and hid behind intentionally misrepresented Biblical concepts to justify it. He wrapped his adoration and enabling of evil in a warm blanket of sanctimonious, faux righteousness, and hid behind the adoration of his fellow "progressives' that love the same evil that he did. He abused the concepts of love, sin, sinner, repentance, forgiveness, neighbor, charity, etc. to such extents that he might as well be speaking in tongues for all how what he said and what he meant actually line up. Then he would try to use all of the same as a bludgeon to convince the faithful that any degree of self respect, self defense, dignity, or preservation is unreasonable, as one is supposed to be a pathetic door mat that lets his home be invaded, his women and children be raped, his culture and identity be destroyed, and not even complain about it because that would be doing a racism. He washed the feet of unrepentant, heretic invaders to show them how welcome they really were. Some of his last words while alive were chastising my vice president for not welcoming enough criminal invaders into our nation. Then you have the audacity to defend, and even lie for this man? It's repulsive, to put it simply.

I do not hate Catholicism, but I do hate what subverters have done to the Catholic Church, and what they are trying to do to Christianity as a whole.
 
There is no point getting in a theological debate with you, because this has nothing to do with theology at its core level. The late Pope Francis supported the invasion of violent, predatory brown people to prey on whites, endorsed and enabled sexual degenerates that prey on children, and hid behind intentionally misrepresented Biblical concepts to justify it. He wrapped his adoration and enabling of evil in a warm blanket of sanctimonious, faux righteousness, and hid behind the adoration of his fellow "progressives' that love the same evil that he did. He abused the concepts of love, sin, sinner, repentance, forgiveness, neighbor, charity, etc. to such extents that he might as well be speaking in tongues for all how what he said and what he meant actually line up. Then he would try to use all of the same as a bludgeon to convince the faithful that any degree of self respect, self defense, dignity, or preservation is unreasonable, as one is supposed to be a pathetic door mat that lets his home be invaded, his women and children be raped, his culture and identity be destroyed, and not even complain about it because that would be doing a racism. He washed the feet of unrepentant, heretic invaders to show them how welcome they really were. Some of his last words while alive were chastising my vice president for not welcoming enough criminal invaders into our nation. Then you have the audacity to defend, and even lie for this man? It's repulsive, to put it simply.
You refrain from theological debate because your views are not rooted in theology at all.

Self defense has always been venerated in the Catholic faith. No one is saying you should just be a victim. That's retarded and a gross misrepresentation of teachings. Show me a single instance where Pope Francis said "let them rape you."
 
make sure you use a real Bible and not a KJV.
I don't really have a dog in this fight. I just wanted to point out that this is some "trve kvlt" tier gatekeeping. I never will stop appreciating the granular convictions people will live and die by that vary from person to person based on what revision of the story book they were taught.
 
Self defense has always been venerated in the Catholic faith. No one is saying you should just be a victim. That's retarded and a gross misrepresentation of teachings. Show me a single instance where Pope Francis said "let them rape you."
There is however the principle issue. Why did Francis wash the feet of unrepentant infidels? This issue keeps coming up, and its the one cudgel that I see getting swung from conservative Catholics to trad LARPERs. I too, am actually curious as to why he did that.
 
You refrain from theological debate because your views are not rooted in theology at all.

Self defense has always been venerated in the Catholic faith. No one is saying you should just be a victim. That's retarded and a gross misrepresentation of teachings. Show me a single instance where Pope Francis said "let them rape you."
Ah, projection, one of the favored weapons of the progressive.

Yes, you are saying that when you defend, justify, enable, fund, facilitate, and encourage the invasion of violent criminal invaders, and even go so far as to kiss the feet of the invaders. You do not have to verbally state a concept to clearly and thoroughly communicate it, as I am sure you are more than intelligent enough to already realize.
 
No, I'm not in Europe.
Well for one you used the term "migrants" which tends to be more common in Europe. In America we call them illegals, and I haven't had a single Priest say anything about accepting illegal immigrants to me.

Why did Francis wash the feet of unrepentant infidels?
The washing of feet is something Christ did during the Last Supper. As for why he did it to those black muslims specifically, the most charitable I can be is that he was going for a "love thy enemies" thing but it really is just abysmal optics and I wish he had not done that.
 
Back
Top Bottom