Caged New pope elected
- Thread starter Dremora
- Start date
Swede Immigrant
Well-known member
Pope Francis appointed him as cardinal, so they share the same views. And I’m not very confident he’ll pull a bait-and-switch.
Weebhunter3000
mess with crash u get the bash, the moid, the wolf
He’s a libshit who retweeted a post about giving condolences to George Floyd and is pro-immigration. Basically Francis 2.0.
Another American win
THE TRUE DIGLET
a carrot a day keeps satan away. never selling my
"elected"
Weebhunter3000
mess with crash u get the bash, the moid, the wolf
Common Catholic activities.
McFucks
Well-known member
Or trans.
Itransheartblox
I love knocking out teeth!
or both
Kikehater1488
Guest
Suprise suprise, a "conservative" still acts like a lefty, and he also has a history of sheltering pedophiles.
Anon_Humor
I used the sharty before it was cool
You're Orthodox; Why would you care for what shenanigans Catholics are up to? It's not even your church or business. --- Though, I can say that I don't like the new pope. --- It should've been the black dude or some Italian, South American, or Iberian.
Deadpan
Genius IQ Retard
Robert F. Prevost has heritage from all the ethnic backgrounds you previously mentioned.
Pope Leo XIV - Wikipedia
Pope Francis clone but more vocally anti-Trump and pro-immigration. Most of his rexosts on xitter are rexosting other xatholics xomplaining about Drumf. Extremely sad days for the Church. He will likely use his new position to promote mass immigration in Western countries as the Church has been doing for decades.
I would actually say he is worse than Bergoglio, for a few reasons. First, he seems more charismatic and ambitious, less ascetic. He will still probably do the renunciatory silliness but to less of an extent than Francis. Secondly, he's an American Catholic, meaning he is much more tuned into American politics and will be better at commenting about them in a way that is quite clear and non-vague. "No true catholic would support [X discrete policy]" etc etc
I'm not sure if he is the actual legitimate pope. Pope Francis, I am sure without a doubt was not the legitimate pope. However, I'm not sure if Pope Francis's bishops were illegitimate, because he was given the ministerum of Benedict. Even if they were, the conclave is supposedly guided by the Holy Spirit, but because you never know what goes on in the conclave it is impossible to tell who the true pope is. Giuseppe Siri is suspected by Vatican II Sedevacantists to have been the true Pope.
I am, at the end of the day, not a Catholic, but a Pagan. But the Catholic Church probably does have the most preservation of "The Tradition" of anything in the West. So, I think it matters what happens in the church.
I would actually say he is worse than Bergoglio, for a few reasons. First, he seems more charismatic and ambitious, less ascetic. He will still probably do the renunciatory silliness but to less of an extent than Francis. Secondly, he's an American Catholic, meaning he is much more tuned into American politics and will be better at commenting about them in a way that is quite clear and non-vague. "No true catholic would support [X discrete policy]" etc etc
I'm not sure if he is the actual legitimate pope. Pope Francis, I am sure without a doubt was not the legitimate pope. However, I'm not sure if Pope Francis's bishops were illegitimate, because he was given the ministerum of Benedict. Even if they were, the conclave is supposedly guided by the Holy Spirit, but because you never know what goes on in the conclave it is impossible to tell who the true pope is. Giuseppe Siri is suspected by Vatican II Sedevacantists to have been the true Pope.
I am, at the end of the day, not a Catholic, but a Pagan. But the Catholic Church probably does have the most preservation of "The Tradition" of anything in the West. So, I think it matters what happens in the church.
1Based Frog1
Well-known member
Honestly, it doesn't really matter who’s pope at this point, or whether he’s legitimate or not. The Catholic Church was never truly biblical to begin with. It’s a man-made institution built on tradition and power, not Scripture. From the start, they’ve twisted and turned the message of Christ into a system of control and influence, with little regard for the core teachings of the Gospel.
HardcoreBlackpill
Well-known member
Looks like another kiddie diddler
Weebhunter3000
mess with crash u get the bash, the moid, the wolf
Just say Catholic man, it’s the same thing.
It's a fun show to watch, that's about it. I'm not looking at it with any expectations.
It can most likely trace itself to Jesus Christ, when he gives the keys to Peter. I'm not Catholic though
Itransheartblox
I love knocking out teeth!
new epstein island guest
GuestChud
Guest
The Traditions and Liturgy are based on Scripture doe. The Mass is full of biblical references.
Atheist say the same about protestants and muslims. Any religion or ideology can be seen as a "system of control" in the sense that adering to it will change the way of life, personality, etc of that person/group of people.
1Based Frog1
Well-known member
Surface references don’t mean the foundation is scriptural. Pagan temples had rituals too, it doesn’t make them biblical. Just because the Mass quotes Scripture doesn’t mean the institution follows it. Christ didn’t establish a Vatican bureaucracy or call for a priesthood that mediates grace through sacraments. That’s tradition built over centuries through man’s scaffolding, not God’s blueprint.
Protestantism emerged in protest against centralized control, it decentralized power away from Rome. Islam, on the other hand, was political from the start, and most modern Protestant groups don’t stone apostates or impose theocracy.
Yes, every belief system shapes people, but not every system demands obedience under threat or rewrites truth to fit power. There's a difference between voluntary conviction and institutional mind control.
