Pope Francis last week approved a ruling at the Vatican that permitted priests to administer blessings to same-sex couples.
I’ve seen this idea a few times now that somehow being inclusive will ‘spread division’ which makes absolutely no sense at all. Including people and groups repairs division.
This was one of the things the majority of Australians parroted when they voted ‘no’ to recognising Aboriginals in our constitution. Somehow a respectful act of inclusion would divide us? So long as you don’t think for even a second about it it’s easy to believe and get outraged I guess. We all gotta exclude people so that we can unify.
Before EVERYONE had to hate the same specific people, and then this guy says that you don’t have to hate them, so now you got some people not hating, while others just don’t want to quit hating.
If we can’t agree on who’s better than who, how will we know how much better we are than everyone else?
They dont even believe their own nonsense. By their own religion’s texts, they are commanded to love others and not judge them because that is a supreme act of arrogance bordering on blasphemy (i.e if they followed their own religion, they would leave the judgement of others to their god. Doing the judging themselves is basically tantamount to saying they know better than their god does) And here they are arguing against the pope that its their god given right to be assholes toward certain people.
If you think being inclusive is divisive, you’re probably the one doing the exclusion and by extension the division.
It’s the long overdue start of the “division” between those who use the lords name in vain and those who actually love their neighbour.
On another note, Jesus would probably have flipped a lot more than just their tables, ngl
he’s just marginalizing you assholes, and that feels like division to you… it should feel like division… you are being separated out and told to fuck off…
Hang on, evangelicals source in protestants, don’t they? We already get they hate the pope, shaddup already
Evangelicals fear the lost of believers as Catholicism once seen as old-fashioned embrace modernity.
Note that I’m absolutely not for religion.
The church who is wholly responsible for the hate and violence against the LGBT+ community suddenly decides it’s “ok” to bless us?
FUCK OFF you sick cult. No one needs religion. Religion prevents progress and the evolution of Humanity.
Treat your fellow Humans with respect is all we need.
Your money laundering, pedophile, hypocritic cult can burn in the fake hell you so desperately believe in!History is rife with anti-Popes. I kind of wonder when we’ll get to see our very own!
Isn’t the Pope infallible? So if the evangelical leader finds himself ‘divided’ against the Pope, shouldn’t the evangelical leader admit they’re wrong and repent?
[Rhetorical question, we all know he’ll just double down.]
To catholics, the pope is only “infallible” via ex cathedra. i.e when speaking from the chair. The last time this happened AFAIK was 1950.
Isn’t the Pope infallible? So if the evangelical leader finds himself ‘divided’ against the Pope, shouldn’t the evangelical leader admit they’re wrong and repent?
Protestants in general don’t recognize the pope’s authority, so not really. In point of fact, they generally see him as barely-christian at all (and guilty of trying to intrude between god and the people’s salvation.). The whole temple veil being torn open was symbolic of removing the need for clergy at all.
Though, of course, this doesn’t mean that protestant clergy aren’t as likely to assert their moral authority, too, in a supernatural-sized “trust me, bro”
I think the article is specifically referring to Catholics though, not Protestants.
No, the article is about Protestants. Specifically Franklin Graham, who is I believe Southern Baptist.
Franklin Graham is… definitely not catholic. IIRC, he’s Baptist, like his father - Billy Graham
The alignment between Catholics and Protestants in US politics is a relatively recent phenomenon. Up through the 70s, Protestant groups were generally anti-Catholic (something that was a factor when Kennedy ran). The KKK was anti-Catholic. Prejudice against Catholics, who were often suspected of having more loyalty to the Pope than the country, was pretty constant throughout US history.
That started to change in the 80s. The Southern Baptist Convention, which was controlled by moderates at the time, had originally supported the Roe decision. Catholics, on the other hand, were against abortion and birth control (and also largely against the death penalty). When the federal government started to demand that Baptist colleges start to admit black students, that all changed. Abortion became the wedge issue of choice. Conservative Catholics leaned into the shift, with growing political power fueled by donations to Catholic lobby organizations and by the creation of JPII as a charismatic media star.
As a former Catholic and a strong atheist, I have absolutely no love for the Catholic Church. I do, however, believe that Francis is sincere in his beliefs and attempts to reform things. I suspect that the next pope is going to make Ratzinger look like a hippie - they’re going to become ultra-conservative. But for now, as a member of Team Rainbow, I really do appreciate what he’s trying to do. And if it can break off even a portion of the Catholic vote, so much the better.
Yeah… tolerance of things that religious morons don’t understand (and therefore hate) is completely unacceptable!
It’s not likely to happen, but it would be great for everyone if the voting block composed of American Catholics and American evangelical Protestants were to splinter.
