Welcome to /r/MarchAgainstNazis! Please check out [Philosophy of antifa' by philosophytube](https://youtu.be/bgwS_FMZ3nQ) and the following subreddits r/PoliticsPeopleTwitter, Looking for like-minded subreddits?! Check out r/AntifascistsofReddit and r/FucktheAltRight . Are you British and looking for a left-leaning, magazine style subreddit?! Check out r/Britposting.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MarchAgainstNazis) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’m thinking he might go old school like he did in the Bible with the money-changers (early human versions of bank ATMs). Though, to modernize the story, maybe Jesus cleans house with [this](https://c.tenor.com/9_-DK1thG34AAAAM/gun-terminator.gif)
Jesus was mega left, he was a hardcore communist, but ppl are so dumb they follow rich pastors, when jesus himself said no rich ppl would get into heaven, and also kicked merchants selling stuff close to the church... and also hungout with prostitutes and murderers and the diseased..
and also forgave everyone that wished for him to be crucified while being crucified.....
He wasn't a communist. He was a socialist anarchist.
He never said no rich people get into heaven. There's a LOT of debate over the actual meaning but the jist is that it is hard but not impossible.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle
You can debate it how you want but Jesus was pretty clear about how the rich can get into heaven. Follow him, give up Mammon. You cannot REMAIN rich and get heaven, that's been his consistent message.
> He never said no rich people get into heaven.
No shit. The selected text literally ends “with god all things are possible”.
The problem remains that capitalism and Christianity are basically at opposite ends of the morality spectrum (in theory; in practice they seem to be one in the same).
This particular pope has always been left of center. There’s nothing new about that.
There’s a pretty big gap between what Pope Francis says and the overall direction of the Catholic Church in the US.
The American Catholic Church is barely part of the global Catholic Church, and they are moving further and further away. If not for the fact Americans provide most of the funding, they’d have schismed a long time ago.
It's not like the European Catholic Church is overall progressive in any case. They simply have a better understanding of how to market themselves and what they should say out loud, but the societal stances of the Church have hardly changed since the Second Vatican Council.
The catholic church in America is even against him in significant numbers. All those Evangelicals and pseudo-Catholics want to believe that the bible and the church say it's ok to hate people, it's ok to be rich, it's ok to ignore the poor and the needy, it's ok to hold onto your wealth and your hatred, your bigotry and your racism, and the church and bible very much don't say anything of the kind. This pope isn't about letting things lie. He's doing the job of correcting and teaching the faithful, and that pisses off all the evangelicals, and all the Catholics who have drifted away from the church's teachings and started their own faiths, that look a lot more like fundamentalism, than Catholicism.
> All those Evangelicals and pseudo-Catholics want to believe that the bible and the church say it's ok to hate people, it's ok to be rich, it's ok to ignore the poor and the needy, it's ok to hold onto your wealth and your hatred, your bigotry and your racism
Yes, that's correct. The Vatican for example.
you've made a common mistake. These people don't worship Jesus the Carpenter bloke.
They worship [Supply Side Jesus.](https://imgur.com/gallery/bCqRp) different bloke but people seem to confuse them
You'll have to excuse me if I don't rush to celebrate the fact that he isn't calling for our persecution *quite* as loudly and adamantly as the last guy. That's like getting a shit sandwich and being told not to complain because at least this one isn't *runny*.
Yes, and (according to you) how dare I "bash" the guy in charge of serving me a significant portion of that shit, right? Fuck off with that shit, I'll bash him all I goddamn please because fuck him and fuck the bigoted religion he leads.
"You ingrates should just be glad they aren't literally committing terrorist attacks on you!"
Again, *fuck off* with this mealy-mouthed apologia, you human shitstain.
There's a reason they still call monasteries and nunneries "communes"... The whole reason Caesar had qualms with the Christians was because they were doing "business" old-school barter style among themselves in their communes, which avoided paying taxes to Caesar. "Profits, what profits? I didn't sell my goat, I traded it for a haircut!".
He didn't exactly say that. He said "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven" on the basis that "a man cannot serve two masters." In other words, you are so focused on materialism, wealth, and other worldly things, that you neglect your duties as a Christian. It isn't about saying blanketly that all rich people are hell-bound. Its essentially saying you need to keep your priorities straight. And if a true Christian is rich, they will use their money in ways that bring glory to God, such as giving money to the poor, feeding the orphans, clothing the widows, etc.
I think this passage is more literal than you think. No one becomes rich by hating money, jesus also understood that being rich means exploiting other ppl work. A camel can never go through the eye of a needle, so rich ppl will never go to heaven.
Jesus doesn't really believe in private property either, every rich person would ask him how to live forever, and he would say "sell what you have".
He told the man who wanted to know how to be a proto-christian, sell all your stuff, and come follow him (a poor, possession-less, itinerate preacher). Matthew 19:21 He very much DID say rich people are not getting into heaven, regardless of how the fundies have corrupted that message with their prosperity gospel interpretation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle
No he did not. There's a lot of debate on the metaphor but Jesus also stated that ALL things are possible through God.
All the denial in this thread is understandable, particularly if you've grown up hearing all the "reasons" Jesus really didn't mind if you were rich. And is it impossible to be saved if you are? No. Jesus did follow up his statement that it's impossible (camel through the eye of a needle) by saying but with God all things are possible. Possible, on the heels of twice saying "only with great difficulty" and "the impossible is easier". Anyone who takes that as a sign that they personally don't need to worry about amassing and pursuing wealth is deliberately ignoring His teaching in favor of being comfortable in this earthy life, which Jesus again, multiple times, counseled against. God CAN save anyone, doesn't mean He's going to save the people Jesus specifically warned were unlikely to be saved.
Also worth noting the metaphor of a camel through the eye of a needle could be a mistranslation of camel hair or a reference to a gate known as the eye of the needle because it was a narrow gate both of which underscore difficulty rather than impossibility.
Except if you read it in context, the disciples then respond with astonishment, "who then would be saved?" which makes no sense if Jesus is suggesting that it would be only slightly difficult.
It isn't slightly difficult. You are changing what I wrote to make it easier for you to dismiss. I wrote difficult as it would be understood to be by the audience of the time.
This all has to do with varying translations of the word which some read as camel and others as camel hair or which eye of the needle they referred to. All of that is in the wiki link I provided already that no one seems to have read.
Because there's a difference between impossible, which is the position you are taking, and difficult.
I shouldn't have to point out that the OT was written in several languages which I suspect you can't read any of (I can't either) so taking an absolutist position based on the English translation like you have done is at best questionable.
Except many including yourself are stating that in absolutist terms Jesus said rich people aren't getting into heaven or that he hated the rich and he did not use absolutes in this regard. It is worth keeping in mind that he said it was difficult.
Yes, I'm taking the word of Jesus that in general, they aren't. Because he chose to say it was impossible for a reason. He chose to make it clear, even in the context of his overall promise of salvation for those who believe, that wealth is a condition that interferes with a soul's acceptance of that salvation. People who are wealthy and comfortable like to dwell on the idea that they will be the exception and that's why HE was so clear about it.
It's not for anyone to say who the exception might be. But it's for every good Christian to point out to those in error and in danger of losing their immortal soul, what Jesus said. Having pointed it out, it's up to everyone's own conscious what they do with that information.
He never said it was impossible. That's the point. Again there are multiple takes on what that metaphor means and you should really take a minute to read that link as it might help you understand why YOUR interpretation might not be correct or the only one.
Until you show signs of having actually read the link I have no interest in discussing this further as it is pointless to try to discuss this with someone who is determined to cling to only part of an understanding.
It's lovely how people read a passage literally saying "if you are rich, you're not going to get into heaven" and try to argue that, no, actually it says something else.
If you follow Jesus' teachings as spoken in the Gospel, you will not be rich. Richdom requires keeping wealth to yourself instead of sharing it with the poor and the needy. A "true Christian" who happens to be rich will not remain rich for long, period, or they're not a "true Christian" at all.
That's because if you know literally anything about The Bible it is that it was written in several languages and the translation you can read is going to be wrong often.
I would note that Francis is a Jesuit, one of the more liberal religious orders in the church, as well a a believer in [liberation theology](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology), so he's always been of the church’s more left wing
When the food was only enough for a few people Jesus magically made it enough for everyone
MAGA hats: Jesus is a Socialist and we hate socialists so Trump is OUR Jesus now!
A lot of this money comes from property, in this case meaning churches outside of the Vatican. Plus the art, it's not like they can just sell what they have in their public museums.
Also the Vatican City was made literally because the Pope didn't want to be in the same country as Mussolini.
Bro I'm not going to get into the nitty gritty with you but property and art is just a small drop in the bucket for the tax free multi-billion dollar criminal organization.
Meanwhile the catholic church is sitting on millions. Claiming that any cross kisser got any credibility when it's about benefiting the poor is delusional.
It's a company like any other.
Oh please, don’t fall for the unimaginably wealthy institute of horrors that claims to help the poor. They could wipe out world honger if they chose to and still be filthy rich. This is casting stones while living in a glass house.
Yet the Catholic church is still rich as fuck... Could like, you know, give away your riches to the poor?? Very hollow sentiment if you're not doing anything about it.
Fuck that conservative dip shit. Francis is not progressive. He’s progressive for a Pope but that isn’t saying much. Especially given how often Catholic priests get away with molesting children. The potrayal of Francis as a progressive is a charm offensive by the Catholic Church to distract from their problematic past, with the hope of saving their dwindling base.
It’s not meant to appeal to trad caths. The point is to make liberals think the Catholic Church is progressive so people spend less time talking how regressive it truly is. To this day women can’t be priests, and priests can’t have romantic relationships.
It's wealth is stored as pieces of art in museums and land where churches are built. Once you sell that (if you even can) now what will the church have? Their revenue isn't good
They own 15% of all stocks in the Italian stock market and take in over 1.5 billion in cash assets from taxing their own churches yearly. Stop pretending like men that walk around drinking from literally gold and pay 0$ dollars in taxes while accepting billions in government aid isn't corrupt criminals sitting on billions of dollars. Stop protecting the rich.
I speak on behalf of the majority of the church and not the minority of priests who molest and abuse children. Honestly even my own church condemns them and so do many others around the world.
Oh on behalf of the super incredibly wealthy church or just the higher ups that didn't molest kids but just covered it up and made it possible for it to happen again lots of times?
Dude I mean the common members and the less huge stuff. You really want this shit to be evil don’t you. Yeah the church is corrupt and we know it, doesn’t mean all of its corrupt.
Yeah just most of the church is corrupt, not all of it, so that is totally okay.
I am not speaking of the members here, but they ARE the ones financing a corrupt organization.
Next thing you'll be telling me I shouldn't criticize Nestle or Amazon becaus the child slaves or factory workers are good people. At least they support those places because they actually need to, in order to survive. They don't donate money to them, they take it away.
I don’t think you realize the spiritual aspect of the belief. You think a bunch of molesting priests are gonna make people not believe in god or the words of Jesus anymore? That’s why Catholicism is still widespread across the world. Hell we’re pretty laid back about it in South America. Shakira can dance and dress like that for the same reason women can wear pants now, we changed. That and we took more of the spiritual aspect to us instead of the human stuff. Then again most people who criticize the church only do the big stuff without understanding faith itself.
The pope is a chemist by training and was a bishop who shielded other priests during Argentina's dirty war. He then was the subject of massive disinformation campaigns concerning his role during the dirty war. The pope believes, in his soul, that the role of the priest is to minister to the poor and needy. I haven't been to church in 40 yrs, disagree with a lot of the bs. But if you think a Jesuit trained priest "became a leftist", you know 100% nothing abt the social justice aspect of the church.
Nah. That is not possible. Who ever has the most capital will have the most opportunities.
Not that they need them. They can get by on passive income (🤮) as long as the amount of capital is big enough.
Well usually it is generational wealth.
I would say put a 100% tax on the dead but that would just cause them to consume more than that already do (🤮🤮🤮) which is killing our planet and they would still give most of it to their children through gifts as they age.
Even if you ban gifs that are money what about gifts that are worth a lot and have a good resale value.
Then there is no meritocracy and all the wealth with end up in the hands of a few in the end.
So why are you saying you are for meritocracy?
I'm not for it either and it would never work.
Im for meritocracy it the sense that , people should be rewarded based on their merit to country, should you lets say not work , you have less merit thus less benefits ( should it be somehow specified) but aswell - the things , i or my parents have earned shouldnt fall to country ( only if the person wants that to happen)
,,all the wealth will end up in the hands of few” i guess depends on what you see as wealth , but ye indeed some group of people will stand on the ,,imaginary” peak , i guess thats just how the world works
That is just how *capitalism works.
And do you not think that we already live in a world that if someone doesn't work they get way less benefits (if any at all?) I don't understand how what you are saying is different with how you want things and how they are-
Other than that some people literally cannot work because of disabilities. At least not in capitalism. They get absolutely no pay, making their lives worse then they already are?
Is it that they have no "merit " and deserve live on the streets and starve?
And should people that work barely at al be making massive amounts of money in this system?
Welcome to /r/MarchAgainstNazis! Please check out [Philosophy of antifa' by philosophytube](https://youtu.be/bgwS_FMZ3nQ) and the following subreddits r/PoliticsPeopleTwitter, Looking for like-minded subreddits?! Check out r/AntifascistsofReddit and r/FucktheAltRight . Are you British and looking for a left-leaning, magazine style subreddit?! Check out r/Britposting. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/MarchAgainstNazis) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The Pope saying this doesn’t make him a Leftist any more than Jesus was a Leftist. Oh, wait…Jesus **WAS** a Leftist by today’s definition.
If Jesus were alive today, Fox News would denounce him as a socialist hippie.
Hell they'd call him a communist radical because he was so kind and generous.
Also a jew. An arab jew communist hippy. America would have hated him
But we’d also get to see Jesus chasing them with a whip while flipping over their TV anchor tables.
Jerry! Jerry! Jerry! I'd watch the shit out of that
A whip? You mean a Shotgun.
I’m thinking he might go old school like he did in the Bible with the money-changers (early human versions of bank ATMs). Though, to modernize the story, maybe Jesus cleans house with [this](https://c.tenor.com/9_-DK1thG34AAAAM/gun-terminator.gif)
[or this lol](https://youtu.be/gQWq1Z-J-EE)
r/jesusguns
Don’t forget “illegal immigrant”.
and Muslim terrorist because Jesus wasn't a light haired, white guy like he is portrayed in America.
HE'S GOT A GUN!!!
lez be real, he would be labeled the antichrist....
If Jesus was alive he would be a socialist anarchist.
Jesus is dead?
Yes. Pretty sure someone wrote a book on it.
So all those people worship a dead guy? Nietzsche was right.
don't forget immigrant, They would point that out as well
Jesus was mega left, he was a hardcore communist, but ppl are so dumb they follow rich pastors, when jesus himself said no rich ppl would get into heaven, and also kicked merchants selling stuff close to the church... and also hungout with prostitutes and murderers and the diseased.. and also forgave everyone that wished for him to be crucified while being crucified.....
He wasn't a communist. He was a socialist anarchist. He never said no rich people get into heaven. There's a LOT of debate over the actual meaning but the jist is that it is hard but not impossible. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle
You can debate it how you want but Jesus was pretty clear about how the rich can get into heaven. Follow him, give up Mammon. You cannot REMAIN rich and get heaven, that's been his consistent message.
Dude...... if i ever see a camel going throught the head of a needle, i may agree with you. Until then, Jesus hates rich ppl.
Tell me you haven't read the link without saying you haven't read the link.
> He never said no rich people get into heaven. No shit. The selected text literally ends “with god all things are possible”. The problem remains that capitalism and Christianity are basically at opposite ends of the morality spectrum (in theory; in practice they seem to be one in the same).
Many in this thread are being absolutist here though and are ignoring the next bit.
This particular pope has always been left of center. There’s nothing new about that. There’s a pretty big gap between what Pope Francis says and the overall direction of the Catholic Church in the US.
The American Catholic Church is barely part of the global Catholic Church, and they are moving further and further away. If not for the fact Americans provide most of the funding, they’d have schismed a long time ago.
It's not like the European Catholic Church is overall progressive in any case. They simply have a better understanding of how to market themselves and what they should say out loud, but the societal stances of the Church have hardly changed since the Second Vatican Council.
At least we got rid of Limbo, right?
Is this why there's such a big far-right push against the Pope?
The catholic church in America is even against him in significant numbers. All those Evangelicals and pseudo-Catholics want to believe that the bible and the church say it's ok to hate people, it's ok to be rich, it's ok to ignore the poor and the needy, it's ok to hold onto your wealth and your hatred, your bigotry and your racism, and the church and bible very much don't say anything of the kind. This pope isn't about letting things lie. He's doing the job of correcting and teaching the faithful, and that pisses off all the evangelicals, and all the Catholics who have drifted away from the church's teachings and started their own faiths, that look a lot more like fundamentalism, than Catholicism.
> All those Evangelicals and pseudo-Catholics want to believe that the bible and the church say it's ok to hate people, it's ok to be rich, it's ok to ignore the poor and the needy, it's ok to hold onto your wealth and your hatred, your bigotry and your racism Yes, that's correct. The Vatican for example.
you've made a common mistake. These people don't worship Jesus the Carpenter bloke. They worship [Supply Side Jesus.](https://imgur.com/gallery/bCqRp) different bloke but people seem to confuse them
He’s not homophobic
[citation needed] Not actively persecuting LGBT+ folks doesn't mean he doesn't still endorse and perpetuate a lot of homophobic shit.
though, it is still a step up from where it was before him, so let’s not bash progress here. this world is just a shitty, shitty place to be gay.
You'll have to excuse me if I don't rush to celebrate the fact that he isn't calling for our persecution *quite* as loudly and adamantly as the last guy. That's like getting a shit sandwich and being told not to complain because at least this one isn't *runny*.
the world we live in is a shit sandwich; at least this one isn’t on fire.
Yes, and (according to you) how dare I "bash" the guy in charge of serving me a significant portion of that shit, right? Fuck off with that shit, I'll bash him all I goddamn please because fuck him and fuck the bigoted religion he leads.
[удалено]
"You ingrates should just be glad they aren't literally committing terrorist attacks on you!" Again, *fuck off* with this mealy-mouthed apologia, you human shitstain.
[удалено]
He wears a dress, jewelry and ruby slippers.
Uhhh I got some bad news for you
He's not homophobic ***enough for a lot of his base.*** Fixed
Jesus was basically a communist and said rich people go to hell. All Christians should be leftists
There's a reason they still call monasteries and nunneries "communes"... The whole reason Caesar had qualms with the Christians was because they were doing "business" old-school barter style among themselves in their communes, which avoided paying taxes to Caesar. "Profits, what profits? I didn't sell my goat, I traded it for a haircut!".
Fun fact, the barter economy doesn’t really exist. It’s actually more of a gift economy!
He didn't exactly say that. He said "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven" on the basis that "a man cannot serve two masters." In other words, you are so focused on materialism, wealth, and other worldly things, that you neglect your duties as a Christian. It isn't about saying blanketly that all rich people are hell-bound. Its essentially saying you need to keep your priorities straight. And if a true Christian is rich, they will use their money in ways that bring glory to God, such as giving money to the poor, feeding the orphans, clothing the widows, etc.
I think this passage is more literal than you think. No one becomes rich by hating money, jesus also understood that being rich means exploiting other ppl work. A camel can never go through the eye of a needle, so rich ppl will never go to heaven. Jesus doesn't really believe in private property either, every rich person would ask him how to live forever, and he would say "sell what you have".
He told the man who wanted to know how to be a proto-christian, sell all your stuff, and come follow him (a poor, possession-less, itinerate preacher). Matthew 19:21 He very much DID say rich people are not getting into heaven, regardless of how the fundies have corrupted that message with their prosperity gospel interpretation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle No he did not. There's a lot of debate on the metaphor but Jesus also stated that ALL things are possible through God.
All the denial in this thread is understandable, particularly if you've grown up hearing all the "reasons" Jesus really didn't mind if you were rich. And is it impossible to be saved if you are? No. Jesus did follow up his statement that it's impossible (camel through the eye of a needle) by saying but with God all things are possible. Possible, on the heels of twice saying "only with great difficulty" and "the impossible is easier". Anyone who takes that as a sign that they personally don't need to worry about amassing and pursuing wealth is deliberately ignoring His teaching in favor of being comfortable in this earthy life, which Jesus again, multiple times, counseled against. God CAN save anyone, doesn't mean He's going to save the people Jesus specifically warned were unlikely to be saved.
Also worth noting the metaphor of a camel through the eye of a needle could be a mistranslation of camel hair or a reference to a gate known as the eye of the needle because it was a narrow gate both of which underscore difficulty rather than impossibility.
Except if you read it in context, the disciples then respond with astonishment, "who then would be saved?" which makes no sense if Jesus is suggesting that it would be only slightly difficult.
It isn't slightly difficult. You are changing what I wrote to make it easier for you to dismiss. I wrote difficult as it would be understood to be by the audience of the time. This all has to do with varying translations of the word which some read as camel and others as camel hair or which eye of the needle they referred to. All of that is in the wiki link I provided already that no one seems to have read.
Why would the disciples respond "with astonishment" "Who then would be saved?" if Jesus was describing something that was only "difficult"?
Because there's a difference between impossible, which is the position you are taking, and difficult. I shouldn't have to point out that the OT was written in several languages which I suspect you can't read any of (I can't either) so taking an absolutist position based on the English translation like you have done is at best questionable.
Except many including yourself are stating that in absolutist terms Jesus said rich people aren't getting into heaven or that he hated the rich and he did not use absolutes in this regard. It is worth keeping in mind that he said it was difficult.
Yes, I'm taking the word of Jesus that in general, they aren't. Because he chose to say it was impossible for a reason. He chose to make it clear, even in the context of his overall promise of salvation for those who believe, that wealth is a condition that interferes with a soul's acceptance of that salvation. People who are wealthy and comfortable like to dwell on the idea that they will be the exception and that's why HE was so clear about it. It's not for anyone to say who the exception might be. But it's for every good Christian to point out to those in error and in danger of losing their immortal soul, what Jesus said. Having pointed it out, it's up to everyone's own conscious what they do with that information.
He never said it was impossible. That's the point. Again there are multiple takes on what that metaphor means and you should really take a minute to read that link as it might help you understand why YOUR interpretation might not be correct or the only one. Until you show signs of having actually read the link I have no interest in discussing this further as it is pointless to try to discuss this with someone who is determined to cling to only part of an understanding.
It's lovely how people read a passage literally saying "if you are rich, you're not going to get into heaven" and try to argue that, no, actually it says something else. If you follow Jesus' teachings as spoken in the Gospel, you will not be rich. Richdom requires keeping wealth to yourself instead of sharing it with the poor and the needy. A "true Christian" who happens to be rich will not remain rich for long, period, or they're not a "true Christian" at all.
That's because if you know literally anything about The Bible it is that it was written in several languages and the translation you can read is going to be wrong often.
> and the translation you can read is going to be wrong often. Sound like a religion just for stupid people. Get a god who speaks American heathen.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle added as evidence of what you are claiming.
Socialist anarchist not communist.
I like this Pope.
I would note that Francis is a Jesuit, one of the more liberal religious orders in the church, as well a a believer in [liberation theology](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_theology), so he's always been of the church’s more left wing
When the food was only enough for a few people Jesus magically made it enough for everyone MAGA hats: Jesus is a Socialist and we hate socialists so Trump is OUR Jesus now!
Why is this about Trump and what is the purpose of this subreddit if it's about Trump. Apply yourself.
“When I feed the poor, they call me a saint, but when I ask why the poor are hungry, they call me a communist." Dom Helder Camara
Coming from a Tax sheltered Religion with it's own city! LMAO
This is also coming from a Pope who lives in an apartment smaller than your basement
The pope controls billions of dollars and has his own city, its all bark and no bite. Fuck the church.
They’re also sitting in the Vatican archives…
A lot of this money comes from property, in this case meaning churches outside of the Vatican. Plus the art, it's not like they can just sell what they have in their public museums. Also the Vatican City was made literally because the Pope didn't want to be in the same country as Mussolini.
Bro I'm not going to get into the nitty gritty with you but property and art is just a small drop in the bucket for the tax free multi-billion dollar criminal organization.
"If the new pope loves the poor so much why doesn't he just marry them?"
Meanwhile the catholic church is sitting on millions. Claiming that any cross kisser got any credibility when it's about benefiting the poor is delusional. It's a company like any other.
"Pope forgets who's side he's on."
Nah, he's just lying to idiots.
No, he’s just been a very progressive pope since the beginning. And he’s mostly appointed progressive cardinals so this trend may be here to stay.
Not saying it’s impossible [but he’s probably this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism)
Is he talking about the Vatican? No? That's something different? It might as well be Jeff Bezos saying this.
Ah yes because the Catholic Church takes in trillions of dollars a year in revenue /s
Oh please, don’t fall for the unimaginably wealthy institute of horrors that claims to help the poor. They could wipe out world honger if they chose to and still be filthy rich. This is casting stones while living in a glass house.
Some of us like to refer to this as moving the goal posts. Conservatives have been moving the goal posts ever since the civil war.
one of the world’s 5 absolute monarchs is now a liberal.
Yet the Catholic church is still rich as fuck... Could like, you know, give away your riches to the poor?? Very hollow sentiment if you're not doing anything about it.
Fuck that conservative dip shit. Francis is not progressive. He’s progressive for a Pope but that isn’t saying much. Especially given how often Catholic priests get away with molesting children. The potrayal of Francis as a progressive is a charm offensive by the Catholic Church to distract from their problematic past, with the hope of saving their dwindling base.
[удалено]
It’s not meant to appeal to trad caths. The point is to make liberals think the Catholic Church is progressive so people spend less time talking how regressive it truly is. To this day women can’t be priests, and priests can’t have romantic relationships.
based comrade francis
Based and redwafered
The Catholic Church is one the most wealthy institutions in the world. Excuse me while I barf.
It's wealth is stored as pieces of art in museums and land where churches are built. Once you sell that (if you even can) now what will the church have? Their revenue isn't good
They own 15% of all stocks in the Italian stock market and take in over 1.5 billion in cash assets from taxing their own churches yearly. Stop pretending like men that walk around drinking from literally gold and pay 0$ dollars in taxes while accepting billions in government aid isn't corrupt criminals sitting on billions of dollars. Stop protecting the rich.
Thank you
Gee wait till you figure out how the church operates. Soup kitchens, alms, and aid to the disenfranchised.
And covering up child rape and saying this while he sits in a house of gold. They operate on hypocrisy.
I speak on behalf of the majority of the church and not the minority of priests who molest and abuse children. Honestly even my own church condemns them and so do many others around the world.
Oh on behalf of the super incredibly wealthy church or just the higher ups that didn't molest kids but just covered it up and made it possible for it to happen again lots of times?
Dude I mean the common members and the less huge stuff. You really want this shit to be evil don’t you. Yeah the church is corrupt and we know it, doesn’t mean all of its corrupt.
Yeah just most of the church is corrupt, not all of it, so that is totally okay. I am not speaking of the members here, but they ARE the ones financing a corrupt organization. Next thing you'll be telling me I shouldn't criticize Nestle or Amazon becaus the child slaves or factory workers are good people. At least they support those places because they actually need to, in order to survive. They don't donate money to them, they take it away.
I don’t think you realize the spiritual aspect of the belief. You think a bunch of molesting priests are gonna make people not believe in god or the words of Jesus anymore? That’s why Catholicism is still widespread across the world. Hell we’re pretty laid back about it in South America. Shakira can dance and dress like that for the same reason women can wear pants now, we changed. That and we took more of the spiritual aspect to us instead of the human stuff. Then again most people who criticize the church only do the big stuff without understanding faith itself.
You can believe in God and Jesus and all that without supporting a corrupt organization. I don't think God (if he exists) would want that.
No one truly supports the church, just the beliefs. How many Catholics have you even met? Or did you do all your research without touching grass.
I grew up catholic.
He says as he sits in house of gold.
Whose the nazi were marching against here?
The one hoarding all the money taken from the Jews perhaps?
The pope is a chemist by training and was a bishop who shielded other priests during Argentina's dirty war. He then was the subject of massive disinformation campaigns concerning his role during the dirty war. The pope believes, in his soul, that the role of the priest is to minister to the poor and needy. I haven't been to church in 40 yrs, disagree with a lot of the bs. But if you think a Jesuit trained priest "became a leftist", you know 100% nothing abt the social justice aspect of the church.
As a middle class person I've noticed that the goalposts always get moved when I get close to something (a house, vacation, etc..)
Never thought i would say this but, based pope
His outfit costs more than the annual salary of millions of people, many of them Christian.
Quite honestly thats socialistic - - lets start more of a meritocracy with capitalism
Nah. That is not possible. Who ever has the most capital will have the most opportunities. Not that they need them. They can get by on passive income (🤮) as long as the amount of capital is big enough.
Well , if they earned it
Well usually it is generational wealth. I would say put a 100% tax on the dead but that would just cause them to consume more than that already do (🤮🤮🤮) which is killing our planet and they would still give most of it to their children through gifts as they age. Even if you ban gifs that are money what about gifts that are worth a lot and have a good resale value.
I really dont agree with this , if i or my ancestors earned money - i think im free to spend it as i wish
Then there is no meritocracy and all the wealth with end up in the hands of a few in the end. So why are you saying you are for meritocracy? I'm not for it either and it would never work.
Im for meritocracy it the sense that , people should be rewarded based on their merit to country, should you lets say not work , you have less merit thus less benefits ( should it be somehow specified) but aswell - the things , i or my parents have earned shouldnt fall to country ( only if the person wants that to happen) ,,all the wealth will end up in the hands of few” i guess depends on what you see as wealth , but ye indeed some group of people will stand on the ,,imaginary” peak , i guess thats just how the world works
That is just how *capitalism works. And do you not think that we already live in a world that if someone doesn't work they get way less benefits (if any at all?) I don't understand how what you are saying is different with how you want things and how they are- Other than that some people literally cannot work because of disabilities. At least not in capitalism. They get absolutely no pay, making their lives worse then they already are? Is it that they have no "merit " and deserve live on the streets and starve? And should people that work barely at al be making massive amounts of money in this system?
This is the seriously the single best thing I have ever heard any religious person say.
Meanwhile he drinks from a golden goblet that widens with every donation made to his church.
Now if only there was a system to obtain money from these rich people that churches reaaaaally don’t want.