The Pope didn’t even say anything incorrect at all in the video. He didn’t explicitly say the boy’s dad went to heaven, just said that God smiles upon the dad’s act of baptizing his children. What, was the Pope supposed to tell the kid that his baptism didn’t count and God looks down at him with scorn like some kind of illegitimate child?
What, was the Pope supposed to tell the kid that his baptism didn’t count
If you don’t baptize the kid with holy water from the Champagne region of Heaven, you don’t get embraced with God’s True Love. You just get sparkling salvation.
- Impossible water
- “I can’t believe” it’s not holy water
I do get the joke, but because we’re obsessed with making people Catholic we can technically use any water, any liquid in an emergency.
It wasn’t an emergency, but I made 60% of a Catholic once by blessing 80 proof rum and performing a baptism upon request at a party
yes. sins of the father and all
I mean, if we’re supposed to take religion seriously as anything other than the purposefully explicit backdrop of bigoted fascism, then yes words should mean things.
your father is NOT in heaven, grieving childJesus probably wants you to bully the kid who’s dad died if you really think about it
“Christ’s vicar on earth is wrong!” is one of my favorite American catholic takes.
Like bruh. bruv. bro. Stop and think about what you just said.
Imagine being Catholic and hating the Pope, hilarious
That’s just called being protestant
These guys are real and they’re everywhere
Mel Gibson for starters
deleted by creator
Catholics said my cats won’t be in heaven so they can fuck right off. That was truly the last straw for me, on top of alllllll the other shit.
Weird position to take for a religion with a name that spells Cat Holic.
I think the pope has also come out against that and said that animals can have an afterlife
hahaha my conservative catholic fundie mother will probably have a problem with what the LIBERAL POPE says
If your religion has no rainbow bridge, it’s no good.
My religion is Mario kart
Blue shell the bourgeoisie!
I wasn’t catholic, but the baptists said the same thing and it had the same effect on me.
Being angry at the pope for not responding to the kid “Another kkkrakkka Down”
Dogmatic ritualized gibberish clearly states that my fantasy of your dead father involves him being boiled in a big pot for eternity, and if you can’t tell a dead man’s kids that you’re not doing them any favors.
It’s not fucking heresy ffs this guy has less theological knowledge than a 13th century peseant.
It’s not fucking heresy ffs this guy has less theological knowledge than a 13th century peseant.
It may very well be Warhammer 40k brain, the kind that cryptofascist dipshits get when they get excited about Exterminatus and want to say “heresy/xeno/witch” a lot to justify their genocide fantasies.
I think you might be putting the cart before the horse here. Warhammer was trying to satirise these guys
Which has in turn been embraced by this kind of guy (especially as the series went on to be less satire and portray the space fascists as heroes more frequently)
no he’s making an actual theological argument.
Not if he’s making that argument against the pope’s position, he has no standing to make any arguments for anything.
Honestly when you look at the medieval peasant religious movements in the 13th and 14th centuries the presence of visionary women is really striking, of which Joan of Arc is only the most obvious. Many of the most important mystic writers were women. Probably were also the best. So I expect many of them would have known far more about Christianity that this fuckhead.
This guy would have been burned at the stake so damned fast if he was asked half the trick questions Joan was asked.
Don’t forget that the catholic propaganda back then worked exactly like the current imperialist one does. Most of the people killed for heresy were not for speaking nonorthodox but for the political and economical resistance to the church.
Most succint take on this had XVI century polish bishop of Kraków, Andrzej Zebrzydowski, while commenting mass conversions of polish nobility to calvinism: “Let them believe even in the goat, provided they pay tithes”. And indeed they only rebelled over century later after decades of counterreformation.
It didn’t even have to be to the Church, as Joan of Arc illustrates. And of course what happened to Jan Hus was fucked, he had some odd ideas but none were actively heretical, and betraying a guest is the ur-example of how you get cursed by the gods (admittedly the Reformation and Wars of Religion was one hell of a curse)
deleted by creator
Broadly, the sacraments are “required” for salvation but in the sense that a) engaging in them sincerely is a pretty good way to ensure salvation and b) Catholicism insists both faith and works are needed for salvation and confession etc are required for that.
You can be saved via private prayer or divine intervention, because stop telling god what to do.
Tradcaths disagree with this because of the doctrine of “no salvation outside the church”. This is due to a very limiting view of what the church is (and of what Jesus is, but that’s another post).
Firstly the above sentence is a tautology, since the church is by definition the community of saints on earth. Secondly it’s the universal church, and calls to all peoples through god’s grace regardless of how much water was sprinkled on their head.
Finally a person who honestly seeks gods truth and salvation and fails to find it has what is called invincible ignorance (a much broader concept than “never saw a bible” and in fact a state some tradcaths are probably in.) and will be saved regardless. And there is always direct personal revelation right up to death, of course.
This is not apologetics and I am not a theologian, just an attempt to explain church doctrine as actually given to people who don’t think the only valid council was Vatican I
deleted by creator
Do you know how many years of religious trauma you’ve just undone by teaching my apostate ass about the concept of invincible ignorance?
There are good reasons they don’t teach it, since it generally quickly leads to universalism without some other theology backing it up, and certain (rather than hopeful) universalism is a heresy.
But most of the time they’re just trying to instill the sad grimdark Irish Catholic thing where you must be sad and guilty all the time because the British spent 200 years preventing you from going to mass.
I also want to add that I have any number of issues with “normal” catholic doctrine. Church is fucked and needs a full clean out and reset. I’m just trying to give the centrist doctrine a fair shake.
“No Timmy your dad is burning in hell because he didn’t follow the bible” I say as a devout and pious Catholic.
Protestants are fuckin’ weird
Just living in a state of barely contained rage about people they’re never going to actually meet
I’m pretty sure “Protestanism is a mental disorder” is theory
Having a liberation theology Pope has really made those masks fall off - I love it.
He’s not LibTheo, he spent his career trying to stop the Jesuit left. He’s just not a frothing conservative.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
That would make the Christian Right quote the Fourteen Words more than John 3:16, and would create a new Avignon papacy.
Half of them are already closet sedevacatists.
Come on man let us have this.
Have you seen the other popes we’ve had ? Shit, the previous guy’s Emperor Palpatine looking ass was an actual balls out nazi
Man, just a non-Nazi Pope makes him seem LibTheo, shows the state of the Vatican.
He’s not LibTheo, he spent his career trying to stop the Jesuit left
Indeed, but he seems to have somewhat reconciled the Liberation Theology movement in Latin America with the Vatican in recent years.
A few weeks ago, the Pope visited Marseille and said that we should stop drowning people in the mediterranean sea and welcome them.
The Christian right has been losing it’s mind ever since, it’s really hilarious.
Tell that to the kids whose abuse he covers for
:-( yeah
The Vatican also said that China is the most Christian oriented country due to its harsh drug policy and perceived conservativism (which they backpedaled when China doesn’t seem to be interested of loosing up control over their archbishop in China). The fact that Vatican says stupid shit that sounds left is because they know that China (one of the country with the biggest growth in Christianity) and LATAM are their market to siphon more cash out to feed their opulent life
It does seem inconsistent with a loving God that he would damn people eternally for not saying the right things.
Luther’s theory of people being given a chance to convert after death seems much more reasonable than this for example
Calvinists will say with a straight face that God is Just and Merciful while believing that God arbitrarily selects some people for salvation and damnation based on nothing they have done and will just torture most people forever despite that being definitionally arbitrary and cruel
Calvinists will say with a straight face that God is Just and Merciful while believing that God arbitrarily selects some people for salvation and damnation based on nothing they have done and will just torture most people forever despite that being definitionally arbitrary and cruel
Calvinism is terminal stage rules lawyering and powergaming all for the sake of making the rich and powerful feel righteous by default and leaving no room for good deeds, good works, or love in their calculations.
I was in a D&D party with a Calvinist and this is pretty spot on.
The thing is, and my fellow Christians gasp when they hear this: Jews don’t believe in Hell. Jesus was a Jew. A rabbi even. Jesus Christ did not have a concept of hell and you will not find a verse where he talks about people suffering for eternity.
The earlier Hebrews did not have a concept of hell, but an idea of hell had developed in certain Jewish groups before Jesus’s time.
Ehh… I’m sure Bible scholars could say this has been mistranslated or something but here is what I was taught by Southern Baptists while growing up:
Mark 9:42-48, Jesus is speaking "42 “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea. 43 If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. [44] [b] 45 And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. [46] [c] 47 And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where
“‘the worms that eat them do not die, and the fire is not quenched.’[d]"
Jesus did have a concept of hell. His ideas like other Jewish teachers developed post-Hellenism and merged ideas from Greco-Roman ideas of afterlife with Jewish theories of sheol. His parable on Lazarus and the rich man shows some intersection there.
But yes, the theory of eternal conscious torment,at least how moderns understand it, was not a thing as I understand it.
deleted by creator
It’s mostly just an afterlife that isn’t heaven. And heaven sounds pretty crap if you go by the Bible. We’re talking being a servant to, and glorifying god in name and deed, forever. In exchange for permanent satisfaction of any material need. Pretty good if you’re an Iron Age farmer that’s already subservient to some feudal lord regardless.
I know what you mean, but the iron age was very specifically not a feudal society
It is a matter of Catholic Doctrine that he does not and salvation is possible without the sacraments even at the moment of death.
1 Peter 3:18 and following are clear that post-death, Jesus preaches to souls who did not accept him during their earthly life. Whether this is a metaphor, I have no idea (Peter talks about Noah’s ark here, just a really weird passage), but it seems like there is mercy offered for all
There’s lots of textual evidence that can be taken in support of infernalism, annilationism, and universalism. Much of the latter in Paul’s letters
ultimately which you accept is dependent on the way you interpret the text. And the Calvinist infernalist interpretation is to my mind heretical and sinful as they aren’t loving their neighbour. I find that universalism best fits the fact of God being both all powerful and all loving.
If you accept that there is none of His children God does not love, that God would never give up on one He loves (God is faithful after all), and that the saved are saved by grace and not through works (Paul again often used to support Calvinism) therefore God through persistence will eventually reach everyone He wants to the universalist position is consistent
Ironically the universalist argument is similar to the Calvinist one but a universalist interprets the elect as everyone
Also a lot of our modern biblical ideas come from James the 1st writing his own Bible (Constantine too but James the 1st did to protestantism what Constantine did to Catholicism) James the 1st was also a madman believing in goblins and having people tortured also he popularised the sport of golf outside of Scotland
Pretty big accusation for one who rejects the divine miracle of transubstantiation
“I’m gay am I going to hell?”
FUCK YEAH BUDDY DON’T EVEN BOTHER TRYING YOU KISSED A NOT EAT FUCKING SHIT SO
“My dad claimed to be faithful even though he cheated on my mom 50 times am I going to hell?”
Yeah that’s fine women aren’t people anyway 🤷
deleted by creator
I won’t lie, I miss Catholic mass and I’m practically a Pagan these days. That shit soothed me.
Same. I go to midnight mass once every few years just for the nostalgia.
“L Atheist father. Packwatch rip bozo. Get fucked kid” -Poop
