As a life-long atheist with little interest in religion, do every-day Catholics actually do what the Pope says? Because, it seems like he’s mostly ignored.
My grandma was a devout Catholic her whole life, even winning awards for her service to the church.
When the last Pope condemned Trump’s border wall during his first term, her response was, “He needs to mind his own business.”
I’m glad she died before his second term.
American Catholics are not Catholics. “The pope needs to shut up when he preaches love and compassion” is incompatible with “I am a devout Catholic”
It’s a general problem with a large chunk of American “Christianity”, not just Catholicism. Conservatives want to be Christian, but they also want to hate foreigners, the poor, homeless, and everybody else Jesus told us to love and care for. I’ve heard stories of pastors preaching about Jesus and getting accosted by members of the congregation that it was too soft and too liberal, and regardless of what Jesus said, it’s not something that works anymore.
It “didn’t work” for a lot of people in Jesus’s time either, but that didn’t stop him from preaching it. In fact, I’m pretty sure that’s exactly why he did it. And why they crucified him. Conservative American Christians are exactly the people who would crucify Jesus.
Think of him as a religious celebrity who can make headlines with everything he says. Not everyone will go along with him, there will always be a contingent complaining that this new Pope is too woke if he doesn’t tell them what they wanted to hear, but a lot of people do listen to him. Just being in the headlines all the time is a form of soft power.
If you’re really into Catholic lore and mythology, then yes, the Pope’s word holds a lot of weight. They believe in papal infallibility, which means that when the Pope meets certain very specific criteria, he is literally speaking for God and is thus perfect and unquestionable.
Regular normie Catholics? They believe in the Pope the same way they believe in the Bible: it is the true word of God, but it’s too much of a bother to actually read it. They’re never reading papal edicts, they’re just reading news headlines about the pope like everyone else.
He pretty much is.
The Pope has some soft power when it comes to some morality, but countries routinely ignore the Vatican and it doesn’t really cause an issue.
The relationship is worse with a lot of American Catholics, who haven’t been happy with the last few popes due to their liberalness.
Yes, they don’t obey him, but he has a lot of soft power. Less so in America where money is the primary religion for most, but in South America? His voice has real weight
Less so in America where money is the primary religion for most
Oh yeah, unlike all those altruistic nations where people just don’t care about money. Maduro being a shining example.
🙄
Think about it like this - normal (and actually beliving) people do care what he says. But do rich people do? You know, people running companies or countries that are used to abusing absolutely everyone and everything? xD
He’s the leader of a “country” that exists in the hearts and minds of every Catholic as well as the Vatican proper. There are bound to be people who love him and those who hate him within that “country” the same way it works with any country and as such, his office has influence.
Is it any more than if he was merely the leader of another city state? I’d say so.
Tell me, without looking it up, who the leader of San Marino, the other Italian city state, is. (And if you can, how many other people, especially outside Italy, could do the same?)
A country established by a fascist.
Is that your new word of the week?
Mussolini established the Vatican as a country.
The Patti Lateranensi are bad enough that you don’t need to spread misinformation about them.
The Vatican “state” has existed since the middle ages, and for a period of time was quite big
The Papal states, which was the middle ages version of Vatican City, didn’t exist for a period of almost 60 years, when modern Vatican City was first recognized as a nation, in the Lateran treaty.
At some level, it’s a question of whether you view Vatican City as a new successor state, or a continuation of the former Papal states. The treaty framed it as a new state, which is at least an interesting historical fact.
Yup. At one point the Vatican was most of Italy. I don’t think Mussolini was around then, or he was very old during the war.
“ill just forget about hundreds of years of history”
I didn’t. It wasn’t a modern state until Mussolini. Jfc read a boom.
I don’t read booms. It’s a bad habit and causes cancer.
He’s essentially just a rich landowner that issues random proclamations, so no, no one listens to him.
He’s the leader of the most widespread denomination of the most widespread religion in the world. He selects cardinals all over the world, has influence on church doctrine, etc. Yes, many listen to him and have to listen to him. You’re probably from the US (primarily protestant) and atheist, but don’t project that perspective on the entire world.
I grew up Catholic, forced to go to mass every day until I went to university. You aren’t Sherlock. I have every right to criticize. And I meant state leaders don’t listen. They don’t.
I have every right to criticize.
What you wrote wasn’t criticism (“I like it / I don’t like it”), it was a true/false statement. But yeah, state leaders even in Catholic countries don’t seem to care about his direct proclamations of this sort.
Defining what he really is and that nobody listens to him is criticism.
His brother is a strategically placed ($) maga, and they are supposedly somewhat close. I hope he actually can reach his brother with some of these messages, who may at least try to either influence party direction or remove financing.
I’m more interested in what the Buddhists have to say.
deleted by creator
Pope Leo calls for Venezuela to remain an independent country
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanus_Pontifex
Romanus Pontifex (from Latin: “The Roman Pontiff”) is the title of at least three papal bulls:
- Another in 1455 by Nicholas V[3] praising Catholic King Afonso V of Portugal for his battles against the Muslims, endorsing his military expeditions into Western Africa and instructing him to capture and subdue all Saracens, Turks, and other non-Christians to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery. The Church leaders argued that slavery served as a natural deterrent and Christianizing influence to “barbarous” behavior among pagans.[4][5] As a follow-up to the bull Dum Diversas, the church leaders now took positions aside the Crown of Portugal that it was entitled to dominion over all lands south of Cape Bojador in Africa. The bull’s primary purpose was to forbid other Christian kings from infringing the King of Portugal’s practice of trade and colonisation in these regions, particularly amid the Portuguese and Castilian competition for ascendancy over new lands discovered.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ea_quae_pro_bono_pacis
Ea quae pro bono pacis (For the promotion of peace) was a bull issued by Pope Julius II on 24 January 1506 by which the Treaty of Tordesillas, which divided the world unknown to Europeans between Portugal and Spain, but lacked papal approval as it countered previous bulls by Pope Alexander VI, was approved and ratified by the Catholic Church. The request of confirmation came from the king of Portugal; therefore, the bull is addressed to the chief Portuguese bishops. The treaty was confirmed to “foster peace” between the two Catholic monarchies and solve colonial disputes, hence the title of the bull.[1]
I’m getting mixed messages here from the papacy.
1455
1506
Really?
The current Pope also condemned Israel too so it’s not that hypocritical tbf.
