Talk:Pope Francis

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon christianity.svg

This Christianity related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Archives for this talk page: , (new)

The Pope's Congressional Address[edit]

Hey there. [-Mona-], you have been making some great edits and doing good work cleaning up my stuff. I wasn't sure how far I was allowed to go in editorializing. Over all you have done a great job making the article better. I've then been expanding on what you have done. But there is something I don't understand.

You seem to be continuously implying that the Pope personally thinks gays are okay. For example, you talked about the difference between his personal and professional views. However, I see no difference. As both Pope and a personal person, he believes all people should be loved. And as both, he opposes same-sex marriage and believes acting on one's homosexuality is sinful. The fact that he likes gay people is important. But adding the bit of the dichotomy between personal and professional views seems unsupported. His views are centuries old. Love for humanity, and wanting the best for everyone. Gay = bad. Gay person = person, sinful like the rest of us.

I see you are still editing the document as I write this so I will leave this here and see where the edits you appear to be doing at this moment, as I keep getting notifications on them. Please let me know what you are thinking below. — Unsigned, by: ShawnTheHumanist / talk / contribs 16:37, 4 October 2015

Hi Shawn. The evidence I've seen strongly indicates that Francis is what in America we'd call a Dorothy Day Catholic. Very leftie on economic issues but Orthodox, and so adhering to the orthodox positions on the pelvic issues. As Day did, Francis has sought to de-emphasize the importance of those issues, but he ultimately does support the official dogma. Also, I think he lacks sufficient understanding of a country founded on separation of church and state. His "conscientious objection" thing is simply inapplicable to voluntary, government jobs. It isn't necessarily that way, however, in other nations. But it's pretty obvious Francis has not maintained a 19-year friendship with a man he knows is gay, and given him a private audience with his partner, just for PR. Among other things, that isn't going to go down well with the wingnut Catholics. By all reports, Francis is sincere in his soft approach toward gay people, which predates his ascension to the "Chair of Peter."---Mona- (talk) 15:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

D'aaw, so adorbs[edit]

Women thought they're people too ^^ Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:52, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Francis and the trolls[edit]

He said people should give up trolling and insults for Lent.

How many brownie points does this get him? Anna Livia (talk) 17:14, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

"Not trolling" is a no-brainer if you actually have read the Bible, so he's just representing his religion. (In a way, it would actually be funny if the literal version of the Bible a lot of people claim to be following was actually true. Because all those shitposters in 4Chan /pol/ et al who *cough* idolize Donald Trump and use Jesus's name to do their usual race/religion hatred would be in pretty deep doo-doo...) Soundwave106 (talk) 22:33, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Same-sex Unions[edit]

It appears like His Holiness has voiced support of same-sex unions: It feels like this belongs in the article but I don't know if RW considers CNA a proper source and I haven't seen the documentary myself. The Red Cardinal (talk) 10:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Fuck it, I'm adding it to the article. The Red Cardinal (talk) 03:44, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Dead link - source 79[edit]

Noticed that source 79 is labelled as a dead link. I found an archive of the website. Changing now, revert if necessary :) Moria (talk) 00:20, 3 March 2021 (UTC)