Page 1 of 1

Pope Francis

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 2:00 pm
by Ariel
This pope mister is more dangerous then many people want to believe. This pope has more communist roots, them Christian roots. You can hear it in all he tells us. The Catholic church should send him back to Argentina .

The renegade pope said that Christians spreading the gospel is the same as Muslims waging jihad.
Not only did Pope Francis liken Jesus Christ to the Islamic State (ISIS), he says that “Europeans must breed with Muslims.”

I don’t think that there is a fear of Islam as such but of ISIS and its war of conquest, which is partly drawn from Islam,” he told La Croix. “It is true that the idea of conquest is inherent in the soul of Islam.” “However, it is also possible to interpret the objective in Matthew’s Gospel, where Jesus sends his disciples to all nations, in terms of the same idea of conquest.”

His opinions are stunningly similar to those of top Iman Sheikh Muhammad Ayed (below), who said Muslims should exploit the migrant crisis to breed with Europeans and “conquer their countries.”

Pope Francis, who has taken in 3 Syrian Muslim refugee families into the Vatican but no Syrian Christian refugees, seems to think that the armies of Muslim migrants pouring into Western European countries are nothing to be concerned about. He is absolutely wrong, it is an economic and sociological disaster.

The Pope also said he “dreaded” hearing about the “Christian roots of Europe” because, to him, they take on “colonialist overtones” and he called on European nations to “integrate” Muslim migrants into the continent.

More here



I am sure there are lots of feet he can kiss in Argentina.

Image

Re: Pope Francis

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 3:42 pm
by manfred
Yes even within the the Vatican there are comments like "this pope does not understand anything about Europe" and "he is somewhat naive about Islam, as there is virtually no Muslims in Argentina". His ideas about integration seem to confirm that.

He is also against securing borders in the way Hungary has done. Having said that, you go and try and simply wander into the Vatican. Sure you can pay to go to the museum, but you will not get a long way if you walk through that gate on the side of St Peters, unless you are known by the Swiss guards or at least a bishop.

I think a great many Christians, including Catholics would be offended if explaining Christianity by preaching is likened to spreading Islam in the way ISIS does, with the sword. Sounds like a serious case of "foot in mouth" disease, if you ask me.

What surprises me is the "breed with Muslims" comment. It is uncannily vulgar for a pope or indeed anyone, and while the Catholic church tolerates inter-faith marriages with protestants (but does not encourage them), marriages between Catholics and Muslims cannot be sanctioned because of the Muslim legal claims about the marriage. These are in conflict with the Catholic claims. For example, each insists that the children must be brought up in their respective tradition. A Muslim would normally insist on a conversion if there is to be a marriage at all, so in effect Muslims does not "interbreed", they force a choice by saying there cannot be a marriage without accepting Islam.

Well if the Catholic Church can survive the Borgia popes, Paul ii and his page boys, Leo X and his elephant, Julius ii and his wars and many others, this one will be survived too.

I doubt he will be one of the fondly remembered ones though.

Re: Pope Francis

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 3:51 pm
by Fernando
manfred wrote:Well if the Catholic Church can survive the Borgia popes, Paul ii and his page boys, Leo X and his elephant, Julius ii and his wars and many others, this one will be survived too.

I doubt he will be one of the fondly remembered ones though.
Aren't we, according to Nostradamus, in the final countdown to the end of the papacy?

Re: Pope Francis

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 5:53 pm
by manfred
Fernando wrote:
manfred wrote:Well if the Catholic Church can survive the Borgia popes, Paul ii and his page boys, Leo X and his elephant, Julius ii and his wars and many others, this one will be survived too.

I doubt he will be one of the fondly remembered ones though.
Aren't we, according to Nostradamus, in the final countdown to the end of the papacy?


:lol: The end is nigh stuff has been around for literally thousands of years. The pope belongs to the Jesuit order, and the founder of that order, Ignatius of Loyola, make the following rather apt comment:

While playing cards he was asked what he would do if the world were to end tomorrow. His reply was he would carry on the game of cards. It is a waste of time to worry about things we have no influence on.

Now, as far as the papacy goes, the pope has a right and a duty to guide on issues of CHRISTIAN faith and ethics. He neither has authority nor should make pronouncements on other religions at all. He can speak about how Christians should treat people from other religions, i.e. like any human being with respect. What is silly is talking about Islamic teaching as if knew anything much about it. In fact, it is surprising that he finds it appropriate to comment on such things in his position. It makes him look rather naive because he expresses opinions he should better keep to himself, as even a mere papal opinion can be dividing the church. His job is to bring Christians together and not to divide them.

He is right is saying that obviously not all Muslims are violent or terror supporters, but those who are not, are so despite and not because of the teachings of Islam. He seems to repeat the "extremist" fallacy without much criticism. He is getting a visit from a Muslim cleric next week, may his brain will click....

Re: Pope Francis

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2016 7:09 pm
by Ariel
Paul Joseph Watson is angry...Pope Francis: Shut the F**k Up


Re: Pope Francis

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2016 9:09 pm
by manfred
Perhaps it is useful in this context to say a few words about popes in general...

The Catholic Church points to a passage in the gospels where Jesus says to Peter ""You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18)

Peter (petros) is Greek for "the rock guy", so Jesus equates Simon Peter with this "rock". It seems quite clear that Jesus implies two things, first he intended to create an assembly of some kind, (eklesia translated as church is simply a voluntary group of people, in the original meaning), and second, that Simon Peter is meant to have a leadership role in this group.

It is important to understand that Jesus did not specify what exactly this role was meant to be, nor indeed what the organisation of this group should be like.

Later, Peter went to Rome, preached there, made quite a few converts, and was in the end arrested for being some kind of subversive element and executed.

Because of this period in Rome, later generations styled him the first "bishop of Rome". In fact, the NT mentions "bishops" but they are not really what we understand bishops to be today. They worked in a single church, not a diocese, and they were part of a group of "elders" specially responsible for teaching. So this title for Peter as "bishop of Rome" is a little misleading, as it attaches an office to a person when this office was not yet properly developed.

In addition, when Jesus singled out Peter for a leadership role, he did not mention that any "successors" should also have the same role. This is the major point of contention between Catholics and Orthodox Christians, as well as with Protestants.

In reality, the "bishop of Rome" became most influential simply because he happened to be neighbours with the Roman emperor. The leadership claims of the pope over other bishops developed much later, and out of real politics, and only then the Catholic argument was produced. The Eastern Churches never accepted that, and when one particularly unwise pope tried to force that issue, the great schism ensued, resulting in the Eastern and Western churches being split.

A single head as leader has some significant advantages, such as an easy and fast way to settle disputes and appointments, but there are also problems. Not every incumbent in that role was up to the job, to put it mildly. Some caused huge damage, while others were strengthen the church for many years to come. Some were saints, some where shrewd politicians or good administrators, others downright crooks, engulfed by corruption.

One thing is perhaps less obvious: if the great schism had never happened and the Patriarch of Constantinople had submitted to the pope, Mehmet the conqueror would have had a much more difficult job destroying Byzantium. The pope would have mobilised most of Europe against him.

So where am I going with this... simple ... today, in fact, the pope is one of the big voices in Christendom. That does not mean he is right on everything. In fact he himself only claims to be "infallible" on a narrowly defined set of questions, relating only to dogma, and only if he formally makes an "ex cathedra" statement, something that only happened a couple of times in the last 2000 years.

He is a human being like everybody else, and sure, he can be wrong on things. His appeasement of Islam is definitely ill-advised.

Re: Pope Francis

PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:12 pm
by Ariel
A very good question. Why is that Pontifex? :clueless:

Image

Re: Pope Francis

PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 6:17 pm
by manfred
LOL... telling Muslims to love the "worst of creatures"..? Against Allah's and Mohammed's explicit instructions??.... BLASPHEMY!!! He probably would be beheaded...

Muslims are not known to listen to any Christian people, to them they are, at best, a means to an end...

But I agree, popes from the past would mostly shake their heads and him and wonder what has happened to the church they once ran.

Re: Pope Francis

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:41 am
by Ibn Rushd
Yes, even non-Catholics and non-Christians in North America are astounded at this guy. He can't die quick enough.