Pope Francis condemned the “very strong, organised, reactionary attitude” in the US church and said Catholic doctrine allows for change over time.

Pope Francis has blasted the “backwardness” of some conservatives in the US Catholic Church, saying they have replaced faith with ideology and that a correct understanding of Catholic doctrine allows for change over time.

Francis’ comments were an acknowledgment of the divisions in the US Catholic Church, which has been split between progressives and conservatives who long found support in the doctrinaire papacies of St John Paul II and Benedict XVI, particularly on issues of abortion and same-sex marriage.

  • Sicktatties@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    To be fair, it isnt; but then neither is Evangelicism or Mormonism or any of these other wackadoo cults within which these assholes conflate their hatred and fear with faith.

    • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      What makes Catholicism fake Christianity in your view? Any faith that believes Jesus Christ is the Son of God that died for the sins of humankind meets the threshold, imo. The Catholic Church fits comfortably within that definition.

      • Sicktatties@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If I were being charitable I’d label these heretical creeds as Paulity. They have very little to do with the words and deeds of Christ, or living up to them, and far more to do with how Saul of Tarsus interpreted them.

        You may recall the Catholic Church was born out of the first Nicaean Council, where they canonized the four gospels that best reinforced the idea of the supremacy of the Roman state, and burned the hundreds of other so-called “gnostic” gospels, which (judging by the content of the few that survived) far better encapsulate what I would consider “real Christianity”.

        That said, the whole “No True Scotsman” fallacy really isn’t worth pursuing. It’s been this way since 325 CE, and there really is no painting a happy face on one of the most destructive and inhumane ideologies history has to offer. No matter what my opinion may be, you are correct in pointing out that the Paulity is the institution that is currently regarded as “Real Christianity”, as sick and anti-Christian as it may be.

        • severien@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          All Christians use some interpretation of Bible and Christ.

          From the outsiders it’s a bit funny to observe these squabbles and the heretic accusations.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          You may recall the Catholic Church was born out of the first Nicaean Council, where they canonized the four gospels that best reinforced the idea of the supremacy of the Roman state, and burned the hundreds of other so-called “gnostic” gospels, which (judging by the content of the few that survived) far better encapsulate what I would consider “real Christianity”.

          I believe you are mistaken. That was next big council. The 27 books were finalized by a man who attended the Nicaean Council. When he got back he wrote a letter stating which books he considered to be canon.

        • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          That is an institutional failing of the Catholic Church, it was never endorsed as a part of the Church’s dogma. While I would encourage any Catholic to ask themselves if they really should continue to support an organization that hasn’t done even close to enough to reckon with their many sins over the past two millennia, I still think it’s silly to act like they’re not Christian.

        • cloudpunk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well then you can include baptists in that too.

        • HubertManne@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          the only difference between the priests and pastures is the “born again” churches do not have a central structure to follow up on it so they are all just one offs.

        • rambaroo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          There’s a ton of it in protestant churches too. The national Baptist church is under federal investigation for it right now. The US has always had an easier time hating Catholics.