Pope Francis?

Genuine thoughts on this man right here?

Attached: Pope_Francis_in_St_Peters_Square_Nov_14_2018_Credit_Marina_Testino_CNA.jpg (760x507, 21.32K)

Other urls found in this thread:



Seems to have some kind of sexual fetish involving feet and exhibitionism.

Were I Pontiff, I could not do a better job. This is not saying I like him, this is saying I should never be Pontiff.

the false prophet mentioned in the book of Revelations. He's the face of the final corruption of the Catholic church.

He brought me to Orthodoxy.

The Church has had popes who have said and done worse things, people are overreacting.

Not a catholic, but I actually appreciate his… eschewing of pomp and circumstance. And again, I'm not even a Catholic, but I know very well that he's trying to emulate Jesus by washing/kissing feet. "He who is greatest among you must be your servant." Anyone against that is against their own Lord, and will have to learn the hard way if they do anything less.

I'm not in support of anything the papacy does in terms of liberalism and syncretism, but Francis is hardly responsible for the bulk of it.. and certainly washing of feet or not wanting his hand kissed are good actions.

He is the antithesis of everything catholic church needs right now.
Also I am suspicious of his hooked nose.

It’s almost like the pope is just a bishop and equally susceptible to heresy as any other bishop… and primacy isn’t what RCC says it is… hmmm…

Attached: B896E14E-326E-4A90-AB85-261B3DE733CF.jpeg (750x1000, 61.88K)

you're missing the point. He wasn't saying that pope francis is a heretic but that we had worse heretics. He's saying that this pope is bad personal actions wise but we had even worse popes who commited all kinds of immorality way worse than kissing migrant's feet.

He's an anti-pope, just like every pope after 1958.

Attached: pope3.png (721x413 281.49 KB, 135.93K)

He's a pretty cool guy. Eh kisses feet and doesn't afraid of anything.

I used to think he was a well-meaning guy but not exactly what the Church needed.
After his utter refusal to address the sex abuse claims, it's hard to think charitably of him. It seems like all he cares about is the PR of being "the hip quasi-liberal pope" instead of facing the issues that are driving people away from the faith in unprecedented numbers.

A pope who commits murder is a terrible sinner, but they're not a heretic.
A pope who doesn't commit murder but says murder is not a sin is a heretic (and no longer pope).

Pick one.

All he's doing is helping the government persecute a bunch of scapegoats (some of whom are probably innocent and will be railroaded by the anti-Catholic secular authorities). He's not addressing the actual root cause of the sex abuse crisis, which is sexual corruption in the hierarchy and especially in the seminaries.

Like, how about he excommunicates a few of those Cardinals keeping gay rentboys in their Vatican apartments. How about he excommunicates James Martin or some of the other people trying to normalize sexual perversion. Then I'll believe he's serious. Until then it's nothing but damage control.

Your pride will be your downfall.

I'm saying that he's clearly not doing shit about the sex abuse crisis beyond damage controlling. If he was he wouldn't have sat on McCarrick for years until the winnie the pooh secular press blew open the story and forced him to act. Don't put words in my mouth.

What lists did pope Francis turn over to the authorities? As far as I know you are simply making things up. Perhaps you are thinking of the individual bishops in the United States who acted on their own initiative without advice from Rome?

Attached: C88A4246-DFCB-4CE1-A7BA-353DF8B163AD.png (720x580, 188.12K)

The child sex abuse scandal has been a thing since before Francis was born. How the hell can you blame him for everything?

My God, you prots are pathetic.

Attached: NOT A LIBERAL.jpg (620x387, 87.2K)

We're blaming him for not doing anything about it RIGHT NOW. How does the fact that BXVI also covered up for McCarrick excuse the fact that Francis covered up McCarrick? How does the fact that BXVI did nothing substantive excuse the fact that Francis is doing nothing substantive?

He literally is doing something about it … RIGHT NOW. You just don't accept it because you can't let go of your rage-boner for his humility and foot kissing. You're a Prot, we get it. But since you're a Prot, it's not your problem.

Perverted old men raping boys and covering up for boy-rapists is everyone's problem you moron.

Wew lad

If he's Catholic it's very difficult to tell. I'm sure he'll be condemned as a formal heretic by a succeeding Pope. This too, shall pass. He isn't the first Pope who has been hand picked by global superpowers.

Not Protestant, but what are the lists you are talking about user? I’ll admit I’m not the most well-versed on the subject, but it does seem like Pope Francis was pretty tight with some bad dudes and only started doing stuff once it got leaked. Pope Benedict didn’t seem to do much about it either. I don’t get why he can’t just go ham and defrock a bunch of these creeps, he’s practically a king in terms of powers, no?

I’m actually Catholic bro. I have been paying a lot of attention to my Popes actions, associations and statements regarding the international abuse crisis. That is how I know that you are lying.

Attached: A9FBA970-CECF-4E2C-98B0-388DF77C8146.jpeg (255x170, 31.36K)

Things like this:
As well as dozen of other stories if you'd just do a simple Google search.

Now, I know the next response will be "no, that's bishops going rogue!" but if you know anything about the Catholic Church, you'd know that bishops don't go rogue.

Again …


You’re not making any sense and you’re not producing any proof that Francis has revealed any lists. I’m beginning to think that you’re a protestant Larping as a Catholic to make Catholics look bad. Or maybe you’re just a little special…

Attached: 463D2C13-F9DD-4BFB-9C5A-B1C3E2B905B0.jpeg (3000x1705, 612.08K)

Oy vey …

I really wasn’t trying to be argumentative user, no reason to be uncivil, I just wanted you to back up what you were saying. I will reiterate however, that I don’t understand why Pope Francis can’t just go ham and start sacking guys left and right. It’s entirely possible that I don’t understand Papal structure very well, but Pope Francis seems like he has a lot of power that he’s not using for some reason or another.

He'll probably be anathematized like Pope Honorius I.

The spawn of satan

This just gets worse and worse the more I see it. Imagine how uncomfortable everyone must have been. Notice the second guy desperately whispering in his ear trying to get him to stop.

On the bright side, the young Catholics who actually go to Church more often than each Sunday are very fond of Holy Tradition, and they're certainly not heterodox. We'll see a Pius XIII in our lifetimes.

13 “You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am. 14 Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. 15 I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. 16 Very truly I tell you, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. 17 Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.

yeah dude, imagine how embarrassed the Apostles were when Christ washed their feet.

wait a minute…

There's nothing heterodox about following Christ's example. Screaming about Francis' goofy theology is one thing, but reviling the man for objectively doing something Christ would approve is hypocritical.

Guess what buddy, this isn't 1st century Palestine. Jesus washed people's feet, and people washed Jesus' feet, because that was the custom back then in that culture. I'm 100% sure that Jesus would have done the appropriate thing to make people comfortable and not embarrassed or confused anyone.

Guess what buddy "14 Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. 15 I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you…. 17 Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them."

If doing things that are blessed are a bother to you, you must really ponder who your Lord is. Christ, or?

Are you really stupid enough to believe there;s some kind of transcendant metaphysical significance associated with washing someone's feet? The blessing is humbling yourself and showing hospitality.

In any case, why are we talking about washing feet? Francis didn't wash their feet, he kissed them, and it clearly made them very uncomfortable and weirded them out. Are you saying that they were in the wrong for being made uncomfortable?

I never said that, but I do believe it's an action that Christ said you would be "blessed" if you follow after Him.

You're not striving against me, you strive against Christ. I didn't say this.

16 Very truly I tell you, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him

The meaning is pretty clear; if Christ washed their feet, Francis - being a servant of Christ - shall go even further and humble himself more.

I think Jesus Christ was pretty clear about what he thought of pharisaical adherence to the letter of the law instead of the spirit. Also about doing things in front a camera.

So, you claim that washing someone's feet is a sinful adherence to the old law?

You say this, Christ says they would be blessed if they do as He did. Sorry, but if I have to choose between you or Christ…

Christ raised the dead in front of a crowd, along many, many other things. Did Christ sin?

Are you dumb or just being purposefully disingenuous? I'm saying that the spirit of the washing the feet teaching is to show people hospitality and make them feel comfortable. Francis did the opposite of that.

The equivalent would be if Jesus had brought along a bunch of professional couriers with him and then gotten those couriers to run around from place to place declaring how great Jesus was for raising the dead.

Neither, but Christ says something is explicitly "blessed", and here you are saying Christ is wrong. Which is it?

You know squat; only God knows the hearts of men. How can it be that Christ says one thing and you say another?

…you mean the Apostles…

Nope, you keep putting words in my mouth. Disingenuous it is. The thing he is saying is blessed is humbling yourself and showing hospitality. He's not saying the specific act of washing feet, in isolation, is blessed.
No dipshit, because Jesus didn't send the apostles out for his own self-aggrandizement, he sent them out to preach the gospel to save people from Hell.

Look, Christ says that if you follow His example in washing the feet of those lower than you are blessed. Francis did this same thing, and went further because he knows he is servant of God, and not greater.

Where is the error? You cannot say it is being in public either, for Christ did many miracles in public. Only God knows the hearts of men, not you.

If it is done in imitation of Christ, it is blessed. You say otherwise, in contradiction of Christ.

Christ rising people from the dead is part of the gospel itself, don't rage at me because you tripped over your own words. The primary task of the Apostles' were to spread the Gospel, just like couriers.

You are clearly retarded. Don't expect anymore responses from me.


Isn’t that agreeing that he is a heretic?
Apostasy is apostasy. Placing the church as given to us by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost on the same level as Talmudism and Islam is apostasy. Maybe the papists should google what it means to be in communion with an apostate.

And I say that with love and charity.

The whole argument for Roman Catholicism rests on the primacy of Rome. But the pope does not have primacy obviously if he isn’t orthodox. There is no magic man made jurisdiction like Rome that is automatically protected from heresy.

It's the other way, friend. St. Peter got the Keys and the Promise, anyone not in communion with the Seat is not part of the Church.

No friend, the whole Church got the promise not one magic jurisdiction. Christ said upon this rock of Peter ie the apostles He will build the Church. The jurisdiction of Rome didn’t even exist yet.

There is no magic bishopric or magic see or magic location that is immune from error. Those who accept the apostasy of ecumenism will have their lampstand removed and Rome has unfortunately.

Attached: B51053CD-6BAB-4C2E-A980-FB36F35ADD5B.jpeg (624x390, 104.32K)

Go to bed OrthoLARP

Attached: papacy.jpg (720x1152, 91.13K)

How could Rome have primacy if Francis is an apostate? He prays with Muslims and Jews.

The spiritual leader of your faith is indeed an apostate too… your point? He is only infallible ex cathedra.

Orthodoxy doesn’t have a “spiritual leader” as some kind of papal emperor who arbitrates on what is true and what isn’t, and neither did the early church. All bishops are equally capable of being correct or incorrect. We just have to trust Gods grace, Christ, and the Holy Spirit to guide us to the Orthodox position using the logic God gave us, following Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition.

Praying with heretics is automatic apostasy.

You can argue away a few of the things he says with technicalities and "Maybe he meant this", but his actions show he isn't a very good Pope, I only hope he is doing it out of ignorance and lukewarmness rather than actual malicious intent. He makes Cathokekism look like a joke

Pædophile like the rest of them

No, Christ is addressing Cephas alone in Matthew 16:18. The other Apostles didn't even receive the authority until Matthew 18.

No, He proclaimed Simon Peter alone, and conferred the Keys and the Promise alone.

The Seat is an institution by Christ, not a position where you can freely claim anyone in the spot isn't Pope because you don't like him.

wew lad
wew indeed

Our faith as well as our countries are historically in the worst crisis yet. Here comes this embodiment of decay of our church.
how about…no