I am surpringly annoyed about Americans somehow finding a way to make this about themselves.
In reality I’m much more worried about the likely counterreformist pushback that is likely about to happen. We’re about to find out if a remarkably powerful organization’s leader was able to seed enough support to secure a politically aligned successor, and if the answer is “no” a bunch of organizations are about to get even more ruthlessly conservative at a time when a new strain of fascism is seeking moral support. The Catholic Church has been here before. It didn’t go well.
“Francis appointed nearly 80% of the cardinal electors who will choose the next pope, increasing the possibility that his successor will continue his progressive policies, despite the strong pushback from traditionalists.”
The catch is that he did not appoint by ideology. His appointments were mainly based on the guys doing work for poor people, for migrants, and on them doing their jobs in the global south.
Quite a few of these he made cardinals are somewhat conservative in their views, especially regarding sexuality
It helps a bit that typically those that have more compassion tend to be more liberal, but in general even the more liberal Catholics tend to be somewhat conservative
I mean, there are catholic priests and officials that are very liberal - they do exist. But those people do usually not even get into a position as a bishop, so they are not on the table to potentially become cardinals.
I don’t expect a conservative backlash, on the contrary Francis’s Pontificate has weakened the conservative wing considerably. Given that 80% of the voting cardinals were appointed by Pope Francis, I would expect them to elect a successor that continues in the same direction, perhaps even a more radical one.
During his pontificate Francis also made a lot of efforts to bring in new groups into the corridors of power. Not only by his appointment of cardinals, but also e.g. by reforming the Curia with Praedicate evangelium.
Compared to the iron grip the reactionaries held before my understanding is you’re right. That doesn’t mean that wing is going to get away with a continuist choice. I mean, it’s more likely than it used to be, but I’m not making a call until the Habemus Papam.
We’ll see where it goes. They aren’t exactly transparent about these things, and they’ve been arguing among themselves for a while. We’ll know with the white smoke, I suppose.
There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.
Ah, I didn’t knew there was a president in America that made the mistake of paraphrasing it like that. Shame on americans that keep bein’ fooled in that fake democracy :P
I’m not Catholic, and i don’t follow this stuff closely, but I’ve seen a LOT of popes come and go, and as far as I remember, the chosen pope has NEVER been the early favorite. Anybody whose name is being knocked around right now is unlikely to be the final choice, recently-historically speaking.
I am surpringly annoyed about Americans somehow finding a way to make this about themselves
Me too, bud. Me. Too. Alas, there is no escaping them for me. I do wish more Americans could travel abroad and see the world beyond our borders. I would wager fewer than 20% of Americans have been 50 miles from our borders and it can lead to a pretty insular world view.
Should we make it about a religion that’s known for pedophile priests and them being protected? Or about how religion is a long con scam of power and wealth that has been the leading cause of war and persecution for centuries upon centuries?
Granted, by all appearances, I believe he seemed to be a pretty good guy. Hopefully the next pope will be as good. Take what you can while religions still exist, I suppose.
Because as much as you see it as a domestic throwaway denomination among many, they are extremely and increasingly overrepresented in developing countries (and a couple of European ones as well).
So if you want to know which way the use of contraceptives, the position on gay people or the express support for neofascism is going to go in Africa this is relevant.
It is not about the US or their opinions. And I say this as an atheist.
I am surpringly annoyed about Americans somehow finding a way to make this about themselves
And turning it into politics, because there is no otger way to talk about things
Sure, discussing politics is important to some degree, but it isn’t the most important thing in our lifes
One of the most important persons in the world (atleast for catholics) has died. We shouldn’t laugh about it. We shouldn’t politicize it. We shouldn’t take it to any other context.
I’m surprised and sad at the same time. Even tho i like edgy memes and memes about Pope John Paul II (he is a legend in Poland and polish community do meme about him but in a very respectful way), i really find it bad to do so about Pope Francis right now - so i dislike any post like this
It is literally a political position. There’s about to be an election to choose the next guy.
I agree that it is serious in that it’s going to have an impact on people’s lives, far beyond the relatively small direct power they have. That concerns me.
To be clear, I have zero respect for the institution, but I care about how they wield the influence they have, and I’d much rather have a relatively progressive guy like Francis than a relative reactionary like John Paul II, with all due respect to Polish pride. I’m assuming we can at least agree on taking him over Benedictus.
Europe has a history of stripping power from Christianity? Like, Europe Europe?
Is this some other Europe I don’t know about? There may be an Europe I entirely missed somewhere, I suppose. Because the Europe I know took a millenia to marginally diminish the power of Christianity, and it only happened because of liberal democracy quietly supplanting spirituality for convenience. It was in no way, shape or form a political choice based on them “misbehaving”.
I mean, even if that was true, which hah, nah, the places where the Catholic church is growing these days are in Africa and Asia. Stop making me have to lump Europeans with the gross ethnocentrism of USmericans.
For one thing, Belgium is like 2% of the EU, so barely representative. For another, being actively practicing is less relevant than how much political influence is wielded and how many institutions are baked into the legal and political system to align with a particular worldview.
And for another another, this isn’t about Europe (or the US) much at all. They matter way less than the countries trying to secure a semblance of civil rights in the context of an increasing interference from Western-originated religions using them as breeding grounds for retrograde conservatism.
So you are very welcome to remain oblivious and pretend you have culturally overcome the footprint of Christianity (which again, hah, nah), but that has zero bearing on the relevance of these events.
Yeah sure it impacted our culture. But nobody believes in Christianity anymore. There’s a political party dying because they have Christian in their name. Their voters literally keep dying year after year.
Haven’t really heard anyone talk about this religion the past 10 years.
I’ve heard a lot about Islam though, because of immigrants. Like god damn these people actually still believe in a deity.
Anyways, have fun with your religion stuff. Keep it out of belgium
Nobody around the tiny, itsy-bitsy, entirely irrelevant circle of people you talk to.
I assure you plenty of people “believe in Christianity”, in Europe and particularly outside of Europe. Even more of them use Christianity as a political tool.
Hey, you wanna know how many people “believe in Christianity”? This was Europe this last weekend, not believing in Christianity.
Cultism is such a potent tendency of the human animal that new cults form spontaneously in the absence of established mythologies (or despite them). Fascism is a cult phenomenon, for instance, and the people vulnerable to such belief systems are unerringly broken in the same way that religious people are broken. It’s like someone scooped out the part of their brains responsible for maintaining epistemic norms and replaced it with oatmeal.
I am surpringly annoyed about Americans somehow finding a way to make this about themselves.
In reality I’m much more worried about the likely counterreformist pushback that is likely about to happen. We’re about to find out if a remarkably powerful organization’s leader was able to seed enough support to secure a politically aligned successor, and if the answer is “no” a bunch of organizations are about to get even more ruthlessly conservative at a time when a new strain of fascism is seeking moral support. The Catholic Church has been here before. It didn’t go well.
“Francis appointed nearly 80% of the cardinal electors who will choose the next pope, increasing the possibility that his successor will continue his progressive policies, despite the strong pushback from traditionalists.”
https://www.reuters.com/world/pope-francis-has-died-vatican-says-video-statement-2025-04-21/
The catch is that he did not appoint by ideology. His appointments were mainly based on the guys doing work for poor people, for migrants, and on them doing their jobs in the global south.
Quite a few of these he made cardinals are somewhat conservative in their views, especially regarding sexuality
It helps a bit that typically those that have more compassion tend to be more liberal, but in general even the more liberal Catholics tend to be somewhat conservative
I mean, there are catholic priests and officials that are very liberal - they do exist. But those people do usually not even get into a position as a bishop, so they are not on the table to potentially become cardinals.
I don’t expect a conservative backlash, on the contrary Francis’s Pontificate has weakened the conservative wing considerably. Given that 80% of the voting cardinals were appointed by Pope Francis, I would expect them to elect a successor that continues in the same direction, perhaps even a more radical one.
During his pontificate Francis also made a lot of efforts to bring in new groups into the corridors of power. Not only by his appointment of cardinals, but also e.g. by reforming the Curia with Praedicate evangelium.
Compared to the iron grip the reactionaries held before my understanding is you’re right. That doesn’t mean that wing is going to get away with a continuist choice. I mean, it’s more likely than it used to be, but I’m not making a call until the Habemus Papam.
As a non-Catholic American, I have the same worry for the global geopolitics. It just so happens that the united states is part of those geopolitics.
It sure feels like the tides are turning conservative everywhere, but apparently a Filipino progressive is a favorite to be next
We’ll see where it goes. They aren’t exactly transparent about these things, and they’ve been arguing among themselves for a while. We’ll know with the white smoke, I suppose.
There is a roman saying, “the one who enters conclave as the pope [to be] leaves it as a mere cardinal”
There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.
I can’t read this. The saying I know is probably Roman: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me”.
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/6436-there-s-an-old-saying-in-tennessee-i-know-it-s
As dumb as Bush was, he was smart enough to not say “shame on me” on camera.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushism
You can find the original quote in the examples section.
Ah, I didn’t knew there was a president in America that made the mistake of paraphrasing it like that. Shame on americans that keep bein’ fooled in that fake democracy :P
I’m not Catholic, and i don’t follow this stuff closely, but I’ve seen a LOT of popes come and go, and as far as I remember, the chosen pope has NEVER been the early favorite. Anybody whose name is being knocked around right now is unlikely to be the final choice, recently-historically speaking.
Bummer. Then I guess it’ll be another Italian.
A very old one indeed. It’s never certain how conclaves will go.
I’m waiting for someone to suggest that a it’s time for the first woman pope.
Haha I was thinking that, but there’s no way. And that’s a problem
Me too, bud. Me. Too. Alas, there is no escaping them for me. I do wish more Americans could travel abroad and see the world beyond our borders. I would wager fewer than 20% of Americans have been 50 miles from our borders and it can lead to a pretty insular world view.
Should we make it about a religion that’s known for pedophile priests and them being protected? Or about how religion is a long con scam of power and wealth that has been the leading cause of war and persecution for centuries upon centuries?
Granted, by all appearances, I believe he seemed to be a pretty good guy. Hopefully the next pope will be as good. Take what you can while religions still exist, I suppose.
Yes.
Yes, you should.
Because as much as you see it as a domestic throwaway denomination among many, they are extremely and increasingly overrepresented in developing countries (and a couple of European ones as well).
So if you want to know which way the use of contraceptives, the position on gay people or the express support for neofascism is going to go in Africa this is relevant.
It is not about the US or their opinions. And I say this as an atheist.
And turning it into politics, because there is no otger way to talk about things
Sure, discussing politics is important to some degree, but it isn’t the most important thing in our lifes
One of the most important persons in the world (atleast for catholics) has died. We shouldn’t laugh about it. We shouldn’t politicize it. We shouldn’t take it to any other context.
I’m surprised and sad at the same time. Even tho i like edgy memes and memes about Pope John Paul II (he is a legend in Poland and polish community do meme about him but in a very respectful way), i really find it bad to do so about Pope Francis right now - so i dislike any post like this
It is literally a political position. There’s about to be an election to choose the next guy.
I agree that it is serious in that it’s going to have an impact on people’s lives, far beyond the relatively small direct power they have. That concerns me.
To be clear, I have zero respect for the institution, but I care about how they wield the influence they have, and I’d much rather have a relatively progressive guy like Francis than a relative reactionary like John Paul II, with all due respect to Polish pride. I’m assuming we can at least agree on taking him over Benedictus.
It’s just a religion, we strip it of any power if they misbehave.
I am very curious to know who “we” is in this context.
Europe. We have a history of stripping power from christianity, and we’ll continue till there’s nothing left if necessary.
So yeah, just be powerless, it’s just a religion.
Europe has a history of stripping power from Christianity? Like, Europe Europe?
Is this some other Europe I don’t know about? There may be an Europe I entirely missed somewhere, I suppose. Because the Europe I know took a millenia to marginally diminish the power of Christianity, and it only happened because of liberal democracy quietly supplanting spirituality for convenience. It was in no way, shape or form a political choice based on them “misbehaving”.
I mean, even if that was true, which hah, nah, the places where the Catholic church is growing these days are in Africa and Asia. Stop making me have to lump Europeans with the gross ethnocentrism of USmericans.
I can’t really take it serious when Belgium is labeled as catholic Christianity majority.
The majority of practicing religious people are Muslim.
The churches are empty.
For one thing, Belgium is like 2% of the EU, so barely representative. For another, being actively practicing is less relevant than how much political influence is wielded and how many institutions are baked into the legal and political system to align with a particular worldview.
And for another another, this isn’t about Europe (or the US) much at all. They matter way less than the countries trying to secure a semblance of civil rights in the context of an increasing interference from Western-originated religions using them as breeding grounds for retrograde conservatism.
So you are very welcome to remain oblivious and pretend you have culturally overcome the footprint of Christianity (which again, hah, nah), but that has zero bearing on the relevance of these events.
Yeah sure it impacted our culture. But nobody believes in Christianity anymore. There’s a political party dying because they have Christian in their name. Their voters literally keep dying year after year.
Haven’t really heard anyone talk about this religion the past 10 years.
I’ve heard a lot about Islam though, because of immigrants. Like god damn these people actually still believe in a deity.
Anyways, have fun with your religion stuff. Keep it out of belgium
Nobody around the tiny, itsy-bitsy, entirely irrelevant circle of people you talk to.
I assure you plenty of people “believe in Christianity”, in Europe and particularly outside of Europe. Even more of them use Christianity as a political tool.
Hey, you wanna know how many people “believe in Christianity”? This was Europe this last weekend, not believing in Christianity.
Cultism is such a potent tendency of the human animal that new cults form spontaneously in the absence of established mythologies (or despite them). Fascism is a cult phenomenon, for instance, and the people vulnerable to such belief systems are unerringly broken in the same way that religious people are broken. It’s like someone scooped out the part of their brains responsible for maintaining epistemic norms and replaced it with oatmeal.
You should know that lots of countries and societies will not do this. Especially in the global south.
Unfortunately that’s not the way it works.