54
Does anybody have any good article links on the new pope, Robert Prevost? I assume he's total right-wing dog shit garbage.
(hexbear.net)
this post was submitted on 08 May 2025
54 points (100.0% liked)
askchapo
22987 readers
426 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The tradcaths seem confused about what religion they belong to. You don't like the pope? Tough shit, the cardinals pick the Pope, not the laiety. Oh you wanna really be trad and go back to papal selection from pre-1059? Ok then the current Pope picks the next one, or the King of Bohemia or whoever picks the Pope. You don't meaningfully participate. Deal with it.
It gets worse yet, in Catholic doctrine the pope is not just elected by a bunch of old men, the holy ghost is interceding in the election, making the pope selected by God.
When tradcaths are mad about who get to be pope, they are being mad at God.
In their defense, a lot of lay Catholics are extremely ignorant of the mystical and theological foundations of their religion.
And that especially includes the radtrads/tradcaths, who are some of the most performative "Christians" I've ever met.
That's not really how it works. Benedict XVI himself famously said that the Holy Spirit doesn't choose the pope directly, it just makes sure that whoever the Cardinals select isn't a complete nutter who destroys the Church. Read up on the bad popes, we've had literal murderers and men who bought the papacy. John XII was absolutely wild.
Sidenote, a lot of people get papal infallibility completely wrong when dunking on tradcaths. Yes, Catholic doctrine holds that the pope can be infallibe, when speaking ex cathedra. That's not when the pope gets asked something in an interview, it's a whole thing with a whole celebration and ritual for when they declare a new dogma of the Church. This has only happened twice, to establish 2 doctrines: the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. That's all any pope has said infallibly. Everything else a pope has ever said is just pastoral guidance from the most important figure in the Church, who is still very fallible.
This glosses over the corrolary catholic doctrine that the pope cannot promulgate heretical doctrine as he is guided by the holy spirit. If the pope said some crazy shit in an interview, it's not "infallible", but it also can't be wrong on a doctrinal level.
The idea that there has only ever been two Ex Cathedra statements is also incorrect as per the Congegation of the Doctrine of the Faith. Ratzinger declared that letters written by John Paul II on matters like women ordination were Ex Cathedra and also that in general a lot more stuff is Ex Cathedra than is "traditionally presented".
The angry atheists, as per usual, are closer to being right than the apologists.