Take a good hard look into the life of new pope. To give an overview he thinks that:

Homosexuality is still a sin. He tells people to respect homosexuals, but whent the Argintinian government is going to make sam-sex marriage legal he says, "Let's not be naive, we're not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God."

During his early life he gave up all his fancy posetions (personal cook, facy place to live, chauffeured limo) and made a pledge of poverty. This sounds awefully noble right? Wrong, look at why he had those things to start out with (because he was a cardinal). Think about what the Bible verson of Jesus would have done. He probably wouldn't have even considered giving those things out to preachers of his word anyway. So denying riches should be something that cardinals and popes HAVE to do an shouldn't be praised for. By the way, the pledge of poverty meant that he just had to live like everyone else in the community (what a saint -- sarcasm)

Lastly, there was a criminal complaint filed against him by a human rights lawyer for the abduction of two Jesuit priests. However, there was no evidence to prove that he had anything to do with it. :)

Please leave your thoughts and comments on the new pope

Views: 3455

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The Vatican must have some kind of Nazi obsession.  The last Pope was a Hitler youth.  This new one collaborated very closely with the fascist government that was "disappearing" people in the 70's.  He even ratted out two monks who were subsequently "disappeared."  What was their crime?  Working to improve the living conditions of poor people in the Argentine slums, instead of converting them, as the abominably cruel Mother Teresa would have done.

@DaleHeadley, "This new one collaborated very closely with the fascist government that was "disappearing" people in the 70's" is a claim.  What is your evidence and reasoning?  The men you mention were not "monks" by the way, they were Jesuit priests.

Adolfo Perez Esquivel, who won the Nobel Peace Prize for documenting the atrocities in Argentina during the "dirty war" is on record as saying that Bergoglio is innocent of the charges you just made.  Do you have some evidence that he and the Argentinian legal system does not?

The reasoning is also faulty.  At the time, Bergoglio was the Jesuit provincial responsible for those two men.  Betraying them would have cost him everything in the Society.  Ruined his career, marked him for life.  To what end?  What would be the motive?

For God's sake people, why was this new pontiff not named Pope Peter? Or Peter the Great II. It would of made the present state of catholic disarray so much more palatable.

The pomp and circumstance led with the gilded robes of this overindulgent institution makes a gay parade during the New Orleans Mardi Gras look anemic. 

Ever heard of Opus Dei - a cult and offshoot of the catholic church


I wonder if this latest pope is going to live in the gardener's shed, or maybe in one of the apartments that our own fabulous Bishop George Pell built at the Vatican for visiting pilgrims at a cost of $23 million. That is where all the visiting, voting bishops stay at the moment. The only people who live in humble dwellings are the sheep of the catholic church. He can't give up any trappings, 'cause the bishops and their entourages will stamp there feet, and run him out of town. This pope will not cause waves of any sort, it is not worth his job.

He is vehemently against gay marriage, and has attacked the laws for equality in a number of countries

'At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God'. But they will change tack, as they do, and try to get laws stopped, by debates on social issues like parental surrogacy. The thing would be to ask the Argentinean people what they think of him and the court cases he has had to front up to. He will be another Teflon pope. It would be extremely hard to get a squeaky clean pope of any sort these days, with the amount of scrutiny going on by journalist and atheists.

If I give up my personal cook, can I become pope.

Greg would be SO lost, and for what? the chance to wear a funny hat?

A whole $23 million?

That's about the average cost for building a small, ordinary hotel in an average American city.  With contingency or complexity of excavation with neighboring buildings in close, as there are in Rome, the cost would be more.

Somehow a build cost of a typical Embassy Suites doesn't seem that extravagant.

The robes look funny, but they cost less than an average business suit.

@Heather - I agree, and nothing will change without seculars pushing. Masturbation is still on the mortal sin list - http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=243471

Professor Robert - Atheists aren't evangelical, we just want to live our own life, without intrusion of myths and legends, and fear of hell, unless they are funny of course, but sadly, the bible is not funny, it is horrendous, and the followers are gullible sheep. If every theist followed their particular brand of religion, to the word, there would be rape, pillage, general mayhem, the swallowing of poison and playing with snakes, so it is lucky that they cherry pick these days.

@Kairan - nothing will change with the new pope, gross misappropriation of monies through their own bank and insurance companies, dragged kicking and screaming to court about pedophilia, he is a product of his generation and national culture, plus the usual brainwashing, in his case, the catholic church. There are books out, by Argentineans condemning him, but I haven't read them.


There are still trials going on in Argentina, and probably more will come out, but, like all popes, he will be Teflon.

"Atheists aren't evangelical, we just want to live our own life without intrusion of myths and legends"

Speak for yourself. Personally the only way I can see to live my life without intrusion of myths and legends is to address the problem that the vast majority of humankind lives their lives consumed by myths and legends - too many of which effect me directly.

I find that kind of sad, that an Atheist cannot live without feeling some of the repercussions of religious institutions.

@Suzanne, do you have myths and legends intruding on you on a regular basis?  Perhaps you live near a hellmouth and should call Buffy.

Even the most fundamentalist of theists doesn't follow the Bible "to the word", so that is another straw man.  Catholicism in particular is not fundamentalist, because, well, we compiled the Bible.   We think that God reveals himself through creation, and can be found through the study of nature and science; that God also reveals himself through humans and human history.  The Bible is an important collection of that history of revelation, but then so is the oral tradition, and other things.

So yes, we Catholics would join you in criticizing anyone who was silly enough to believe what you think religion is.

RE: "Even the most fundamentalist of theists doesn't follow the Bible 'to the word', so that is another straw man." - Robert, with all due respect, that simply isn't true, and may be an indication that you don't actually know many fundamental theists.

Not too long ago, in a conversation with a theist (I didn't reveal my own atheism, so that wasn't an issue) in a discussion of the 6-day creation. I pointed out that days were the result of the earth's rotating on its axis before the sun, and that according to Genesis, the sun wasn't even created until the 4th day, making it impossible to determine that days 1-3 were actual 24-hour days. I was trying - diplomat that everyone knows me to be - to give her an out in terms of explaining dinosaurs and opening the door for at least the consideration of evolution, but she would have none of it: THOSE DAYS WERE 24-HOUR DAYS!!!!!

And she was not an isolated example - so much for your straw man theory.

Yet, if you were to continue to ask that theist about other things in other parts of the Bible (eating pork or shellfish, perhaps?), I bet you would have discovered that those she did not follow.   So she was not following the Bible "to the word", even though as you point out she was a fundamentalist believer in the creation parable.


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service