Eponymous Flower: Krazy Katholics Wish Pope Francis Dead

[Cleopatra7]

Various brands of Protestant fundamentalism tend to be the usual fodder at FJ, but I think we need to extend our reach to the Catholic side of things. I did a search, but didn't find anything about the Eponymous Flower blog, which is a group Catholic traditionalist blog:

eponymousflower.blogspot.com

There's the usual trad rants on gay marriage, secularism, feminism, public education, liberal democracy, and the evils of mass in the vernacular, but check out the comments in this thread in which they actually wish for the death of Pope Francis:

eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2015/02/expresses-photos-anomaly-since-february.html#comment-form

The comment by "David Brainerd" at 7:28 reads, "@Gabriel, Benedict was forced out by Francis and the other aberrosexual players in the Vatican. But being a Bergoglian Jew from Argentina at Francis' old Synagogue, I'm sure you already know that."

Stay klassy, trads! :cray-cray: :disgust:

[princessmahina]

!!!!!!!!!

What the hell is going on over there?! I know some traditional Catholics and they don't actively wish the Pope dead. Yikes. I'm glad this is only a fringe group.

Ugh, fundies.

(Oh, and, as I've said before, I am Catholic. I am happy to say that the people in the comment section do not represent the majority of us. People like that make us all look bad :cry: )

[NachosFlandersStyle]

Guys, come on, the phrase "more Catholic than the pope" was not meant to be taken literally! Traditionalists are my most/least favorite of the fundies, as they're the ones I've had the most face-to-face with. I am just loving having Francis as pope, because it's fun to watch them blow a gasket as they are repeatedly reminded that they are not the golden standard that the other billion Catholics aspire to be.

[Howl]

My fave was the woman from Colorado, Latin mass fanatacist, former financial planner, posed with a pink rifle. She had quit her lucrative job to blog about Important Catholic Stuff to her fellow nutcase fudamentalist Catholics.

Anyone remember who that is? I'd like to check up on her for entertainment value.

[sparkles]

My fave was the woman from Colorado, Latin mass fanatacist, former financial planner, posed with a pink rifle. She had quit her lucrative job to blog about Important Catholic Stuff to her fellow nutcase fudamentalist Catholics.

Anyone remember who that is? I'd like to check up on her for entertainment value.

Oh, man. I'd forgotten about her. She was NUTS.

[VelociRapture]

!!!!!!!!!

What the hell is going on over there?! I know some traditional Catholics and they don't actively wish the Pope dead. Yikes. I'm glad this is only a fringe group.

Ugh, fundies.

(Oh, and, as I've said before, I am Catholic. I am happy to say that the people in the comment section do not represent the majority of us. People like that make us all look bad :cry: )

I was raised in a Catholic family by a Catholic mother. Her mother had a brother who served as a Priest for over fifty years. Her father's youngest brother served as a Priest for about twenty-five years. We've had other Priests in the family, as well as Nuns. All the kids born into the latest generation on both sides have been baptized and Confirmed in the Faith - whether we all still believe is up for debate. So you can't get much more Catholic than my maternal famliy. . .

. . . None of whom would ever wish death upon the Pontiff. In fact, the vast majority of the family really likes Francis because he is at least changing the tone of the Church. They still stand for the same stupid stuff as always when it comes to social issues, but Francis is at least making an effort to soften the tone used. I no longer identify as a Catholic, but I do appreciate that small change.

Its kind of sad that the very thing that appeals to most Catholics is what makes these hardcore purists so pissed off. Its also sad that they seem to be under the impression that they speak for all Catholics on the matter. So sorry to disappoint them. :lol:

[Four is Enough]

As a cradle Catholic, fundy Catholics embarrass and infuriate me. Francis is just what the doctor ordered! He knows that Catholicism in the world today has to be met as it is, and in order to meet the people, he has to know and understand what is going on. And gee? What does he say? Feed the hungry. Clothe the naked. Visit the sick and imprisoned. Bury the dead. Forgive. Love. You know, kind of like Jesus? :angry-banghead:

ETA: I have a SIL who's been a nun for nearly 50 years. Even she agrees that couples of the same sex deserve equal rights under the law as heterosexual couples. You'd expect a nun to be old school, but even she lives in the world today, not 1000 years ago!

[Cleopatra7]

I was raised in a Catholic family by a Catholic mother. Her mother had a brother who served as a Priest for over fifty years. Her father's youngest brother served as a Priest for about twenty-five years. We've had other Priests in the family, as well as Nuns. All the kids born into the latest generation on both sides have been baptized and Confirmed in the Faith - whether we all still believe is up for debate. So you can't get much more Catholic than my maternal famliy. . .

. . . None of whom would ever wish death upon the Pontiff. In fact, the vast majority of the family really likes Francis because he is at least changing the tone of the Church. They still stand for the same stupid stuff as always when it comes to social issues, but Francis is at least making an effort to soften the tone used. I no longer identify as a Catholic, but I do appreciate that small change.

Its kind of sad that the very thing that appeals to most Catholics is what makes these hardcore purists so pissed off. Its also sad that they seem to be under the impression that they speak for all Catholics on the matter. So sorry to disappoint them. :lol:

Much of the problem that traditionalists have with Francis is that he has no interest in the trappings of traditionalism (e.g., the Latin Mass, resurrecting fancy vestments, promoting bishops with traditionalist leanings). Part of this is due to the fact that the Latin Mass doesn't appear to be part of Francis' private devotional life, as was the case with Benedict XVI, so he doesn't have a personal stake in trying to resurrect it. I've been doing a lot of reading lately on the history of vestments in the Catholic church, and there's always been a faction who believed in fancy vestments and another faction that believed in simpler clerical attire since the Middle Ages, so I don't see how Francis' preference for more modest vestments can be seen as "untraditional." In fact, the "fiddleback" style chasubles favored by traditionalists are actually a relatively recent development, when the more flowing "Gothic" style chasuble they mock as being of Vatican II go back into antiquity.

Also unlike Benedict, Francis has no interest in trying to chase after the Society of St. Pius X, a move that seriously backfired when the SSPX's Holocaust denying tendencies became widely known. I think Francis' attitude is, "Until you're willing to play by Rome's terms, including accepting Vatican II, don't bother coming around." However, at this point, I think that many SSPX supporters like being apart from Rome, especially since the more hardcore sorts think that the mainstream Catholic church is a completely different religion than what it was pre-Vatican II.

[from the bible belt]

I was raised in a Catholic family by a Catholic mother. Her mother had a brother who served as a Priest for over fifty years. Her father's youngest brother served as a Priest for about twenty-five years. We've had other Priests in the family, as well as Nuns. All the kids born into the latest generation on both sides have been baptized and Confirmed in the Faith - whether we all still believe is up for debate. So you can't get much more Catholic than my maternal famliy. . .

. . . None of whom would ever wish death upon the Pontiff. In fact, the vast majority of the family really likes Francis because he is at least changing the tone of the Church. They still stand for the same stupid stuff as always when it comes to social issues, but Francis is at least making an effort to soften the tone used. I no longer identify as a Catholic, but I do appreciate that small change.

Its kind of sad that the very thing that appeals to most Catholics is what makes these hardcore purists so pissed off. Its also sad that they seem to be under the impression that they speak for all Catholics on the matter. So sorry to disappoint them. :lol:

I am not born catholic but i am more drown tot it than any other forms of religion and i must say, this pop is a relieve from the other popes. He speaks out against abandoning the refugees that come to europe, made sure that the homeless can take a shower in the vatican, shares meals with them and is even known for washing feet

Probably to liberal and know that some people just want him to get killed and go back to the old school :(

[VelociRapture]

I am not born catholic but i am more drown tot it than any other forms of religion and i must say, this pop is a relieve from the other popes. He speaks out against abandoning the refugees that come to europe, made sure that the homeless can take a shower in the vatican, shares meals with them and is even known for washing feet

Probably to liberal and know that some people just want him to get killed and go back to the old school :(

Francis isn't a bad guy, but he also isn't a great guy either. Yes, he does speak out a lot on behalf of the poor and impoverished. And yes, he has taken an interest in the refugee crisis. Those are both admirable causes to champion.

But he still opposes abortion. He opposes birth control. He opposes LGBTQ rights. He words it more carefully than past Popes have and has softened the language used when discussing it, but he still holds the same views as always on a lot of topics important to me - which is a big reason why I can't ever identify as a Catholic again.

The biggest reason I can't be Catholic though is because, as far as I know, Francis hasn't really done much to look into the accusations of sexual abuse among Catholics Priests. Last I knew there were no Bishops being held responsible for the cover-ups and the Church was still spending a ridiculous amount of money fighting litigation tied to the attacks. There is a part of me that quietly thinks that the Pope has taken the approach he has on other issues in order to distract attention from his inaction regarding the abuse.

So, while I don't think he deserves to die or have death wished upon him I also don't think he is the Saintly figure a lot of people like to think he is either.

[from the bible belt]

Francis isn't a bad guy, but he also isn't a great guy either. Yes, he does speak out a lot on behalf of the poor and impoverished. And yes, he has taken an interest in the refugee crisis. Those are both admirable causes to champion.

But he still opposes abortion. He opposes birth control. He opposes LGBTQ rights. He words it more carefully than past Popes have and has softened the language used when discussing it, but he still holds the same views as always on a lot of topics important to me - which is a big reason why I can't ever identify as a Catholic again.

The biggest reason I can't be Catholic though is because, as far as I know, Francis hasn't really done much to look into the accusations of sexual abuse among Catholics Priests. Last I knew there were no Bishops being held responsible for the cover-ups and the Church was still spending a ridiculous amount of money fighting litigation tied to the attacks. There is a part of me that quietly thinks that the Pope has taken the approach he has on other issues in order to distract attention from his inaction regarding the abuse.

So, while I don't think he deserves to die or have death wished upon him I also don't think he is the Saintly figure a lot of people like to think he is either.

True, he hasn't done that and he is still the catholic church speaking. He could out a priest in germany because he spent millions to do up his home, ordered back priests for malpractices. The reason i never joined is what ever church or religion you get into, there seems to be abuse, malpractice, covering up and you name it. (like in the bible belt here)

The reason i took a look or took a fancy at catholism is that okay i am going to admit here :embarrassed: i find the whole being of mother mary comforting, so well away of the god that just judges you and you have to pray to get in "his kingdom"

I don't know, can't explain it it think

[ADoyle90815]

I'm not Catholic, but my dad was raised in the church, and even though my grandparents were devout, they would have liked Pope Francis. As for abortion, he said that priests can now forgive women who have had an abortion.

[VelociRapture]

True, he hasn't done that and he is still the catholic church speaking. He could out a priest in germany because he spent millions to do up his home, ordered back priests for malpractices. The reason i never joined is what ever church or religion you get into, there seems to be abuse, malpractice, covering up and you name it. (like in the bible belt here)

The reason i took a look or took a fancy at catholism is that okay i am going to admit here :embarrassed: i find the whole being of mother mary comforting, so well away of the god that just judges you and you have to pray to get in "his kingdom"

I don't know, can't explain it it think

Don't be embarrassed! Mother Mary has always been one of the more relate-able Biblical figures to me as well, for a number of reasons:

1. She doesn't just accept that she is pregnant with Jesus. She questions the Angel who tells her. I like that she isn't scared or hesitant to challenge him.

2. She finds herself in a very difficult situation - being pregnant before marriage. Many people can relate to facing a tough situation or societal scorn.

3. She loves her son dearly, but has no issue with nagging him when needed (like that whole water to wine bit). This specifically makes her more relate-able to me because every mom throughout history has had a moment where they've nagged their kid.

4. Like any mother, seeing her son in anguish is excruciating for her and losing him devastates her.

When I pray I don't really pray to anyone in particular; but I usually think of Mary when I pray. I feel like she is a much more comforting figure (like you said) and I think that's because she is entirely human, whereas God and Jesus aren't. I feel like Mary would be more understanding and less judgmental specifically because she dealt with hardships and issues that we all face without the benefit of being Divine.

[nausicaa]

Don't be embarrassed! Mother Mary has always been one of the more relate-able Biblical figures to me as well, for a number of reasons:

1. She doesn't just accept that she is pregnant with Jesus. She questions the Angel who tells her. I like that she isn't scared or hesitant to challenge him.

2. She finds herself in a very difficult situation - being pregnant before marriage. Many people can relate to facing a tough situation or societal scorn.

3. She loves her son dearly, but has no issue with nagging him when needed (like that whole water to wine bit). This specifically makes her more relate-able to me because every mom throughout history has had a moment where they've nagged their kid.

4. Like any mother, seeing her son in anguish is excruciating for her and losing him devastates her.

When I pray I don't really pray to anyone in particular; but I usually think of Mary when I pray. I feel like she is a much more comforting figure (like you said) and I think that's because she is entirely human, whereas God and Jesus aren't. I feel like Mary would be more understanding and less judgmental specifically because she dealt with hardships and issues that we all face without the benefit of being Divine.

That was one thing I liked about being Catholic when I was a kid, some more relate-able figures to pray to (well, technically one is not praying to anyone but God, but rather beseeching saints to pray for you). Mary was a more comforting figure, as well as a lot of the saints. And I always liked that you could pray to different saints about different problems. I could picture Saint Agnes in my head; God not so much.

[Cleopatra7]

Don't be embarrassed! Mother Mary has always been one of the more relate-able Biblical figures to me as well, for a number of reasons:

1. She doesn't just accept that she is pregnant with Jesus. She questions the Angel who tells her. I like that she isn't scared or hesitant to challenge him.

2. She finds herself in a very difficult situation - being pregnant before marriage. Many people can relate to facing a tough situation or societal scorn.

3. She loves her son dearly, but has no issue with nagging him when needed (like that whole water to wine bit). This specifically makes her more relate-able to me because every mom throughout history has had a moment where they've nagged their kid.

4. Like any mother, seeing her son in anguish is excruciating for her and losing him devastates her.

When I pray I don't really pray to anyone in particular; but I usually think of Mary when I pray. I feel like she is a much more comforting figure (like you said) and I think that's because she is entirely human, whereas God and Jesus aren't. I feel like Mary would be more understanding and less judgmental specifically because she dealt with hardships and issues that we all face without the benefit of being Divine.

The problem I have with the traditional Catholic concept of Mary is that she's completely removed from the human experience. According to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, she was born without sin, which naturally leads to the question of why god couldn't make everyone that way, rather than make her a special case. Catholic tradition states that she was raised in the Jewish temple to further purify herself, which would not have been a typical upbringing for a young Jewish peasant girl. She gets pregnant without having sex, and it's widely believed that she didn't give birth in the usual way to preserve her perpetual virginity:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DURBIRTH.HTM

The perpetual virginity of Mary, as stated in the reader's comments, has traditionally been defended and examined in three parts: Mary's conception of Christ (); her giving birth to Christ (); and her remaining a virgin after the birth of Christ (). This formulation was used by many of the early Church Fathers—St. Augustine, St. Peter Chrysologus, Pope St. Leo the Great, St. Gregory Nazianzus and St. Gregory Nyssa.

Mary's virginity prior to the conception of Christ is quite clear from the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke, where she is clearly identified as "a virgin." Moreover, when the Archangel Gabriel announced to Mary that she would bear the Messiah, she responded, "How can this be since I do not know man?" indicating her virginity.

At the other end of the spectrum is Mary's virginity after the birth of Christ. In a previous article, concerning whether Jesus had blood brothers and sisters, this question was dealt with in detail. (ACH 7/21/94) Succinctly, we as Catholics believe that Mary and Joseph did not have other children after the birth of Christ. No evidence exists either in Sacred Scripture or Tradition to believe otherwise.

The troublesome part is the middle—Mary's virginity in giving birth to Christ. We remember that one of the sufferings inherited because of original sin is that of "child bearing pains": The Lord God said to Eve, "I will intensify the pangs of your childbearing; in pain shall you bring forth children." (Gen 3:16) Since Mary was free of original sin by her Immaculate Conception, she would be free of "child bearing pain." In wrestling with this belief, the early Church Fathers then struggled to explain this virginity. The Western Fathers seemed to emphasize Mary's physical integrity; for instance, Pope St. Leo the Great said, "She (Mary) brought Him forth without the loss of virginity, even as she conceived him without its loss...(Jesus Christ was) born from the Virgin's womb because it was a miraculous birth." On the other hand, the Eastern Fathers emphasized Mary's joy and freedom from pain in giving birth to Jesus, the Son of God. In either case, remember, the Gospel of St. Luke simply stated, "She gave birth..."

Also see this from the crew at the New Liturgical Movement:

newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/12/virgin-birth-of-christ-what-church.html

The Savior, rather, passed through the womb of the virgin Mary without causing any damage whatsoever. Indeed, as he passed through the closed walls of the room after his Resurrection (without breaking the walls themselves), so too did he pass through the closed wall of our Lady’s virginity (without causing any rupture or break).

This is the constant teaching of the Fathers of the Church and of the Popes and Councils. Indeed, it is worth noting that the Apostles’ Creed specifically names the virginity of Mary in relation to the birth of our Savior: “Born of the Virgin Maryâ€.

By his power as God, the Savior passed through the closed womb of the Virgin Mary as light passing through glass, as thought proceeding from intellect. He did no harm to the physical integrity of our Lady’s virginal cloister, but rather consecrated it!

It is this reality, that Jesus came forth from the womb of Mary without rupturing her virginity, which is the miracle of the birth of Christ. Pope Pius XII (in 1943) refers to this miracle in the encyclical Mystici Corporis, paragraph 110.

The whole thing about Mary's supposed "yes" to god also troubles me. Was Mary really in a position to say no? Could she really have said, "'m not interested in having a baby right now. As a unmarried girl, I could be stoned by my community if I was discovered to be pregnant out of wedlock, and that's not a chance I'm willing to take." Would Gabriel have just moved on to find some other girl, or would he have said, "Sorry Mary. God has decided you're having his baby whether you want to or not, and 'no' is not an acceptable answer." Since the gods of the Greco-Roman world didn't know the meaning of the word consent, I doubt that the Christian god would be any more accepting of a no to his offer. As you can see, I was a really bad traditionalist, because I asked too many questions.

[NachosFlandersStyle]

Francis isn't a bad guy, but he also isn't a great guy either. Yes, he does speak out a lot on behalf of the poor and impoverished. And yes, he has taken an interest in the refugee crisis. Those are both admirable causes to champion.

But he still opposes abortion. He opposes birth control. He opposes LGBTQ rights. He words it more carefully than past Popes have and has softened the language used when discussing it, but he still holds the same views as always on a lot of topics important to me - which is a big reason why I can't ever identify as a Catholic again.

The biggest reason I can't be Catholic though is because, as far as I know, Francis hasn't really done much to look into the accusations of sexual abuse among Catholics Priests. Last I knew there were no Bishops being held responsible for the cover-ups and the Church was still spending a ridiculous amount of money fighting litigation tied to the attacks. There is a part of me that quietly thinks that the Pope has taken the approach he has on other issues in order to distract attention from his inaction regarding the abuse.

So, while I don't think he deserves to die or have death wished upon him I also don't think he is the Saintly figure a lot of people like to think he is either.

I've heard this a lot, and I understand the argument-- sexual ethics are a big part of the reason I'm no longer Catholic. But I also think that Francis's change of tone is a really BFD. For the past decades the raving misogynists like Rick Sanatorium have been allowed--even encouraged-- to believe that they are the Ultimate Catholics and that their politics are the only way for good Catholics to go. But the truth is that most of those guys are TERRIBLE Catholics when it comes to the whole rest of the church teachings-- you know, the ones that aren't about punishing dirty sluts. And I know far too many lay people who bought this idea that you can start wars and tell the poor to go fuck themselves and still be a good person as long as you really, really hate abortion.

I don't expect the church to do a total about-face any time soon, but I think that downplaying the relative importance of those positions is a pretty solid first step. I hope it will lead to people softening their views on the "culture war" crap. And equally important, I hope it will urge people to take real action on the stuff that really matters.

[from the bible belt]

Don't be embarrassed! Mother Mary has always been one of the more relate-able Biblical figures to me as well, for a number of reasons:

1. She doesn't just accept that she is pregnant with Jesus. She questions the Angel who tells her. I like that she isn't scared or hesitant to challenge him.

2. She finds herself in a very difficult situation - being pregnant before marriage. Many people can relate to facing a tough situation or societal scorn.

3. She loves her son dearly, but has no issue with nagging him when needed (like that whole water to wine bit). This specifically makes her more relate-able to me because every mom throughout history has had a moment where they've nagged their kid.

4. Like any mother, seeing her son in anguish is excruciating for her and losing him devastates her.

When I pray I don't really pray to anyone in particular; but I usually think of Mary when I pray. I feel like she is a much more comforting figure (like you said) and I think that's because she is entirely human, whereas God and Jesus aren't. I feel like Mary would be more understanding and less judgmental specifically because she dealt with hardships and issues that we all face without the benefit of being Divine.

Me too, I have no religion anymore but somehow she always shows up in my mind

[VelociRapture]

The problem I have with the traditional Catholic concept of Mary is that she's completely removed from the human experience. According to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, she was born without sin, which naturally leads to the question of why god couldn't make everyone that way, rather than make her a special case. Catholic tradition states that she was raised in the Jewish temple to further purify herself, which would not have been a typical upbringing for a young Jewish peasant girl. She gets pregnant without having sex, and it's widely believed that she didn't give birth in the usual way to preserve her perpetual virginity:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DURBIRTH.HTM

Also see this from the crew at the New Liturgical Movement:

newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/12/virgin-birth-of-christ-what-church.html

The whole thing about Mary's supposed "yes" to god also troubles me. Was Mary really in a position to say no? Could she really have said, "'m not interested in having a baby right now. As a unmarried girl, I could be stoned by my community if I was discovered to be pregnant out of wedlock, and that's not a chance I'm willing to take." Would Gabriel have just moved on to find some other girl, or would he have said, "Sorry Mary. God has decided you're having his baby whether you want to or not, and 'no' is not an acceptable answer." Since the gods of the Greco-Roman world didn't know the meaning of the word consent, I doubt that the Christian god would be any more accepting of a no to his offer. As you can see, I was a really bad traditionalist, because I asked too many questions.

See, I was never taught any of that stuff despite going to (aka. being forced) CCD classes for years. No one ever talked about Mary being raised in the temple or anything. As far as we knew, she was a normal girl who found herself in an abnormal situation - which made her much more relate-able to us. Not sure if the Church changed their position (ha!) or if the people teaching us taught what they felt was more important.

I've heard this a lot, and I understand the argument-- sexual ethics are a big part of the reason I'm no longer Catholic. But I also think that Francis's change of tone is a really BFD. For the past decades the raving misogynists like Rick Sanatorium have been allowed--even encouraged-- to believe that they are the Ultimate Catholics and that their politics are the only way for good Catholics to go. But the truth is that most of those guys are TERRIBLE Catholics when it comes to the whole rest of the church teachings-- you know, the ones that aren't about punishing dirty sluts. And I know far too many lay people who bought this idea that you can start wars and tell the poor to go fuck themselves and still be a good person as long as you really, really hate abortion.

I don't expect the church to do a total about-face any time soon, but I think that downplaying the relative importance of those positions is a pretty solid first step. I hope it will lead to people softening their views on the "culture war" crap. And equally important, I hope it will urge people to take real action on the stuff that really matters.

I see your point. I still don't buy that he is a great man though. Good man? Yes. Great man? No, not yet at least. He is taking baby steps in the right direction with the change in tone, but until he takes a major step - like actually trying Priests who abused children in the Court he set up - I'm going to stop short of really praising him.

He has done a lot of wonderful work on behalf of the poor and impoverished. And I absolutely agree that the change in tone is important because it helps show that not all Catholics are the Santorum type - that most actually care about the real teachings of the Church. It just isn't enough for me at this point to feel like he is really that different from the rest of them is all.

[Cleopatra7]

See, I was never taught any of that stuff despite going to (aka. being forced) CCD classes for years. No one ever talked about Mary being raised in the temple or anything. As far as we knew, she was a normal girl who found herself in an abnormal situation - which made her much more relate-able to us. Not sure if the Church changed their position (ha!) or if the people teaching us taught what they felt was more important.

I think there has been a trend towards trying to make Mary more accessible and less otherworldly, post-Vatican II. However, the more conservative and traditionalist Catholics tend to be really into the Marian doctrines that emphasize how holy and different Mary was from the rest of humanity. John Paul II was particularly attached to mystical Marianism, and even wrote some new rosary mysteries (which traditionalists hate) called the Luminous Mysteries. Some conservative and traditionalist Catholics want Mary to be formally declared the Co-Redemptrix and think that the only reason this hasn't been done is because the Vatican is kowtowing to Protestants, who would be offended by such a declaration:

motherofallpeoples.com/2009/04/mary-co-redemptrix-a-response-to-7-common-objections/

markmiravalle.com/mark-miravalle/09/amsterdam-conference-05-31-08-2/

[from the bible belt]

I think and hope that he is the step to further improvement. I was clad he was a franciskan, they are a long way away from grifting. I don't think he will last long but i do like to think that he is going to set the church up for another direction.

And Mary, she is to me is the mom figure i did not really have. Although it's getting better and better between me and my mom right now she was the one i had in mind when life was rough. She is the only person (and no the bible belt here don't even think about her outside of X-mas) who stood out for me.

At the age of 14 i went to catholic church by myself and the first sermon was about welcoming strangers and people who seek shelter ;)

[FoxyMoxie]

I think and hope that he is the step to further improvement. I was clad he was a franciskan, they are a long way away from grifting. I don't think he will last long but i do like to think that he is going to set the church up for another direction.

And Mary, she is to me is the mom figure i did not really have. Although it's getting better and better between me and my mom right now she was the one i had in mind when life was rough. She is the only person (and no the bible belt here don't even think about her outside of X-mas) who stood out for me.

At the age of 14 i went to catholic church by myself and the first sermon was about welcoming strangers and people who seek shelter ;)

Pope Francis is a Jesuit not a Franciscan.

[CyborgKin]

The comment by "David Brainerd" at 7:28 reads, "@Gabriel, Benedict was forced out by Francis and the other aberrosexual players in the Vatican. But being a Bergoglian Jew from Argentina at Francis' old Synagogue, I'm sure you already know that."

Stay klassy, trads! :cray-cray: :disgust:

aberrosexual players in the Vatican? Sounds... fun?

I don't suppose we're in need of post count titles thanks to the wealth from Joshley Madison, but 'aberrosexual player in the Vatican' seems worthy of consideration.

[genever]

Agreed to most of what's being written here. I converted from Roman Catholicism to Anglo-Catholicism (very high church Anglican) a few years back when I realized it was possible to enjoy very formal liturgy without being completely surrounded by holier-than-thou judgepots. (Not that the Anglicans don't have a few kicking around, but they're much less prevalent and I can't help but feel that choral Evensong makes up for them...)

Hello, by the way. I feel like you're all old friends though I realize that this is exactly my second post.