First American pope in history. Does this mean the new pope will be packing?
New Pope Elected: Cardinal Robert Prevost Elected by Conclave
- Thread starter thebobmaster
- Start date
Recommended Videos
First American pope in history. Does this mean the new pope will be packing?
If they did, he doesn't seem to be playing along.
Cue MAGA whining about a new "woke Pope" in 5, 4, oh hey they're early.
Is Pope Leo XIV a 'WOKE MARXIST POPE'? He is if you're a Trump supporter. | Opinion
Well, MAGA, it looks like you got yourself another 'woke pope' to contend with: Meet Leo XIV.
www.usatoday.com
woke Marxist pope is best kind of pope
I have mostly positive feelings about him. Not a fan of the anti-gay position. I understand the abortion view, and his position on euthanasia is in line with the general population.
That said, he's a positive influence on immigration, women's rights(minus abortion), race/George Floyd, climate change.
I feel like he's just a normal guy in America who became the pope. That said, I love his math degree, and the fact that he could likely run rings around me in any mathematics subject is a breath of fresh air from the people who normally get powerful positions in the United States—lawyers, a few doctors, maybe an economics major or two.
That said, he's a positive influence on immigration, women's rights(minus abortion), race/George Floyd, climate change.
I feel like he's just a normal guy in America who became the pope. That said, I love his math degree, and the fact that he could likely run rings around me in any mathematics subject is a breath of fresh air from the people who normally get powerful positions in the United States—lawyers, a few doctors, maybe an economics major or two.
One that doesn't actually exist? But, ok, annoying the Trumpistocracy is a good start.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,794
- 3,374
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
Oh good, another Pope that protects child molesters. Apparently I'm supposed to like this one though because he also hates Trump.
Nope, fuck that, the Catholic church is rotten to the core.
Nope, fuck that, the Catholic church is rotten to the core.
What does the Pope actually even do? I mean, I know what he does, but with the reveal of a new Pope and his stance on whatever there's always this anticipation that things might change (for the better) with Catholicism, and it never does. He's just going to be another status quo man telling us the status quo should remain the status quo.
The Church changes, just so slowly it's hard to notice.
Like most nations, the Catholic Church has realised that it cannot afford to run on the whims of an autocrat, so in reality, it's the whole institution of the Vatican that runs it, like a government plus civil service, and the Pope is in many ways a figurehead or mouthpiece rather than a ruler. If the Vatican doesn't like what the Pope says, it will rein him in and issue a correction. Changing the church is probably a lot about replacing the machinery of the Vatican - old staff need to move on, and new ones arrive. What the Pope can do is decide or influence Vatican appointments and make cardinals, thus influencing the overall direction of the church. With consistent action across a few decades and probably several popes, this may result in something.
Also, the Catholic Church has been around well over a millennium and doesn't have voters, so it tends heavily to conservatism and likes to take a very, very long-term perspective. The social values of today could be gone in 50 years (consider the fightback against progressive values going on now - and the right may ultimately win). It might be painful in the short term to be viewed as out of touch, but it's not such a big deal if it'll be back in a few decades later. Plus, it can earn a form of respect to hold steady and not just constantly sway with the times.
I wonder, for instance, if the Catholic church might remove the bar on priests marrying in the not so distant future (they made that shit up out of pretty much nowhere about 1000 AD), but everyone on this forum will probably be long dead before they'll accept women priests.
one needn't exist to be the best, contrary to the ontological argument.
Eternal truths tend to do that.
I take issue with characterizing it as "the right winning". (I mean, I take issue with a bunch of phrasing here, but that seems the most fun to acknowledge.) If the left were to choose with humility and grace to accept that there are realities we can't just drug out of existence, I would consider that a win for the left.
It's definitely not out of nothing. It was a firewall against corruption and nepotism. I'm sure you're aware of the concept of political marriages, I'm sure you understand the abuses of monarchy in that time period, the Church put a stop to priests marrying as priests marrying themselves into political power or using their priestly authority for nepotism. It's a practical solution to practical issues.
The current right is controlling, restrictive and proscriptive. Rather than seeing people as fonts of opportunity who could be supported to better themselves and the world around them, they seek instead to make nice, orderly boxes and squash people into those boxes.
And of course they then want to control those boxes, (imposing order and control rarely seems far from the minds of many right-wingers). This is the world we spent generations breaking out of, where people were routinely denied rights and opportunities to do things they were capable of, because it offended against ill-founded societal prejudices. Unfortunately much of the right has resented this, and wants to go back to shoving people into orderly boxes that they can control.
Theologically, it's out of nothing. I mean, they can say a reason, but they could as easily say a different reason to do the opposite.
And as it's no longer the feudal era, the practical reason is way out of date, too.
Really low brow thought here: the thought of hearing the pope speak not only in English, but American-accented English, makes me uncomfortable for some reason. Someone also pointed that it's super weird to see the papal drip again.
Good luck to him I guess. They could have gone way more conservative than him, so that's nice, but they also could have gone more progressive.
Good luck to him I guess. They could have gone way more conservative than him, so that's nice, but they also could have gone more progressive.
I just like that his close associates pre-papacy know him as "Bob." First North American Pope and his name is "Bob;" I fucking love it. And not for any nationalist reasons, just because it's so antithetical to such a regal position. They did an interview with his brother, and dude looks like my neighbor. Not in the literal sense, but in the sense that I would love to be in the room when the brother meets someone new, and the conversation takes the turn of "yeah, I work at Walmart, and won my fantasy football league last season. Family? Well, my brother, Bob, he's the Pope. No, not the Pope of my fantasy football league, THE Pope of the 1.5 billion Catholics around the world. You probably know him as 'Leo.'"
I was raised Catholic, but haven't actively practiced in forever, but my dad is still in the thick of things. I checked in with him to see how he feels about "Bob," and he's happy, so I guess I'm aligned with my dad; Bob is a good thing even if the church at large still has some substantial demons to exercise.
You realize you are talking about the side that isn't designing letters, prefixes, and pronouns with which to put everyone into boxes, right?
It is your misunderstanding that something being real and practical makes it not theological.