Why is christianity so cucked?

Why is christianity so cucked?

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

  1. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Find me the quote where he said that.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Interesting question. I'm waiting too OP.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Find me the quote where he said that.

        after getting the bullshit answer the other day, they reformulated the dubia so as to require a straight yes or no answer and sent them back. no answer as of yet.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Interesting question. I'm waiting too OP.

      good fricking christ. are you people really not paying attention? even a little bit? the "synod on synodality" starts tomorrow where a bunch of homosexuals, even laiety, and non-catholic homosexuals are going to get together to make recommendations on "modernizing" church doctrine. five cardinals who aren't homosexuals, mueller, burke, sarah, zen, and iniquez, wrote five dubia to that heretic that calls himself pope. they did this back in july. traditionally, dubia are requests for clarification that are answered in the affirmative or negative. bergoglio wrote a bunch of jesuit prevaricating shit. with regard to the one that was related to homosexual unions, borgoglio said that there should be a way to bless homosexual unions as long as it's not confused with actual marriage.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >borgoglio said that there should be a way to bless homosexual unions as long as it's not confused with actual marriage.
        What's the quote. Let's see it.
        (PS: This synod crap is insane bullshit)

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          And hilariously, none of them are providing the quote

          do your own fricking googling. it's goddamn everywhere.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Anti abortion=Black person lover

        Zero exceptions

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      All over mainstream news. Might be worth the arrest using Google.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        And hilariously, none of them are providing the quote

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          https://www.mycentraloregon.com/2023/10/03/pope-francis-opens-possibility-for-blessing-same-sex-unions/

          I suppose you're right, it wasn't in verbatim. Papacy usually responds in open clauses to swap sides depending on who's winning the (un)Holy wars this century.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            right by balls:
            since none of you can get your shit together:
            2. Dubium regarding the assertion that the widespread practice of blessing same-sex unions is in accordance with Revelation and the Magisterium (CCC 2357).
            According to the Divine Revelation, attested in Sacred Scripture, which the Church teaches, “listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit" (Dei Verbum, 10), "In the beginning," God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them, and blessed them to be fruitful (cf. Genesis 1:27-28) and hence, the Apostle Paul teaches that denying sexual difference is the consequence of denying the Creator (Romans 1:24-32). We ask: can the Church deviate from this "principle," considering it, in contrast to what was taught in Veritatis splendor, 103, as a mere ideal, and accept as a "possible good" objectively sinful situations, such as unions with persons of the same sex, without departing from the revealed doctrine?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Pope Francis's Response to the Second Dubium
            a) The Church has a very clear understanding of marriage: an exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to procreation. Only this union can be called "marriage." Other forms of union realize it only in "a partial and analogous way" (Amoris Laetitia 292), so they cannot be strictly called "marriage."
            b) It is not just a matter of names, but the reality we call marriage has a unique essential constitution that requires an exclusive name, not applicable to other realities. It is undoubtedly much more than a mere "ideal."
            c) For this reason, the Church avoids any type of rite or sacramental that might contradict this conviction and suggest that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage.
            d) However, in our relationships with people, we must not lose the pastoral charity, which should permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defence of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity; it also includes kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot be judges who only deny, reject, and exclude.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            e) Therefore, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage. For when a blessing is requested, it is expressing a plea to God for help, a supplication to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us live better.
            f) On the other hand, although there are situations that are not morally acceptable from an objective point of view, the same pastoral charity requires us not to simply treat as "sinners" other people whose guilt or responsibility may be mitigated by various factors affecting subjective accountability (Cf. St. John Paul II, Reconciliatio et paenitentia, 17).
            g) Decisions that may be part of pastoral prudence in certain circumstances should not necessarily become a norm. That is, it is not appropriate for a Diocese, a Bishops' Conference, or any other ecclesial structure to constantly and officially enable procedures or rituals for all kinds of matters, because not everything that "is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances can be elevated to the level of a rule" as this "would lead to an intolerable casuistry" (Amoris laetitia, 304). Canon law should not and cannot cover everything, nor should Episcopal Conferences with their varied documents and protocols claim to do so, as the life of the Church flows through many channels other than normative ones.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Find me the quote where he said that.
      He didn't. They lie, they always lie.

      Although the Pope should be saying "I'm not changing anything" at the beginning and the end of his statements, so at least they would have a very hard time twisting what he says.

  2. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's israeli

  3. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >muh pope

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      go back to your desert

  4. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    That pope has been a massive homosexual since day 1.

  5. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's funny how the news will either make him out to be the most progressive Pope ever or absolutely Hitler™ depending on what's conducive to website traffic

  6. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    This is not real and evryone who says it is is a memeflag

  7. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Catholics aren't Christians

  8. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Pope never said this. Stop with the fake news headlines....

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Find me the quote where he said that.
      He didn't. They lie, they always lie.

      Although the Pope should be saying "I'm not changing anything" at the beginning and the end of his statements, so at least they would have a very hard time twisting what he says.

      the frick he didn't. read response points d and e to dubia 2 you cretins:

      Pope Francis's Response to the Second Dubium
      a) The Church has a very clear understanding of marriage: an exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to procreation. Only this union can be called "marriage." Other forms of union realize it only in "a partial and analogous way" (Amoris Laetitia 292), so they cannot be strictly called "marriage."
      b) It is not just a matter of names, but the reality we call marriage has a unique essential constitution that requires an exclusive name, not applicable to other realities. It is undoubtedly much more than a mere "ideal."
      c) For this reason, the Church avoids any type of rite or sacramental that might contradict this conviction and suggest that something that is not marriage is recognized as marriage.
      d) However, in our relationships with people, we must not lose the pastoral charity, which should permeate all our decisions and attitudes. The defence of objective truth is not the only expression of this charity; it also includes kindness, patience, understanding, tenderness, and encouragement. Therefore, we cannot be judges who only deny, reject, and exclude.

      e) Therefore, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage. For when a blessing is requested, it is expressing a plea to God for help, a supplication to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us live better.
      f) On the other hand, although there are situations that are not morally acceptable from an objective point of view, the same pastoral charity requires us not to simply treat as "sinners" other people whose guilt or responsibility may be mitigated by various factors affecting subjective accountability (Cf. St. John Paul II, Reconciliatio et paenitentia, 17).
      g) Decisions that may be part of pastoral prudence in certain circumstances should not necessarily become a norm. That is, it is not appropriate for a Diocese, a Bishops' Conference, or any other ecclesial structure to constantly and officially enable procedures or rituals for all kinds of matters, because not everything that "is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances can be elevated to the level of a rule" as this "would lead to an intolerable casuistry" (Amoris laetitia, 304). Canon law should not and cannot cover everything, nor should Episcopal Conferences with their varied documents and protocols claim to do so, as the life of the Church flows through many channels other than normative ones.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >the frick he didn't. read response points d and e to dubia 2 you cretins:
        Explaining dogma which has been there for untold centuries is not a change to bless same sex.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          can you not fricking read? he explicitly states that there may be something of a pastoral nature that can be done for such couples as long as it isn't confused with marriage. it's the same shit that some german bishops are currently doing: "blessing" homosexual couples.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >he explicitly states that there may be something of a pastoral nature that can be done for such couples as long as it isn't confused with marriage.
            Which is nothing new....and does not mean "blessing". It means go to confession you cretin!

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >pastoral nature
            Counseling.
            Confession.
            Asking for forgiveness.
            Urging repentance.

            But, the idiots want to pretend this means "blessing".

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >he explicitly states that there may be something of a pastoral nature that can be done for such couples as long as it isn't confused with marriage.
            Which is nothing new....and does not mean "blessing". It means go to confession you cretin!

            you fricking twats. that is not at all what "pastoral" means. not even close. even if it did, it couldn't mean "go to confession" because a homosexual living with another homosexual engaging in homosexualry can't be absolved. it's idiots like you that made it necessary for the five cardinals to resubmit demanding "yes" or "no" answers because you heretics will buy anything.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            You can ask for a random blessing ant time. He specifically stated that there are not supposed to be blessings set down by bishops for same sex couples. Idk how you can construe this otherwise

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            because he said as much here and in amoris laetitia.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            He said as much as what?

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            did you even fricking bother to read any of these? he is stating that the divorced and remarried and the homosexuals should have ways to be brought back into the fold. communion eligibility for the divorced/remarried and some sort of blessing for homosexuals as long as it isn't confused with marriage (wink wink).

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Look, the *wink wink* bit is very fricking real, but (again) he avoided saying it.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            you're going to split that hair? "oh he didn't use those exact words, just refused to condemn it and gave tacit approval to bishops to 'do something like it' in opposition to 2000 years of church teaching." talk about fricking distinction without a difference.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >you're going to split that hair?
            Yes. I would rather not have to, but he splits the hairs, and I'm just recognizing it.
            >"oh he didn't use those exact words, just refused to condemn it
            Again, not true.
            >and gave tacit approval to bishops to 'do something like it'
            He did the opposite in that very quote

            e) Therefore, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage. For when a blessing is requested, it is expressing a plea to God for help, a supplication to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us live better.
            f) On the other hand, although there are situations that are not morally acceptable from an objective point of view, the same pastoral charity requires us not to simply treat as "sinners" other people whose guilt or responsibility may be mitigated by various factors affecting subjective accountability (Cf. St. John Paul II, Reconciliatio et paenitentia, 17).
            g) Decisions that may be part of pastoral prudence in certain circumstances should not necessarily become a norm. That is, it is not appropriate for a Diocese, a Bishops' Conference, or any other ecclesial structure to constantly and officially enable procedures or rituals for all kinds of matters, because not everything that "is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances can be elevated to the level of a rule" as this "would lead to an intolerable casuistry" (Amoris laetitia, 304). Canon law should not and cannot cover everything, nor should Episcopal Conferences with their varied documents and protocols claim to do so, as the life of the Church flows through many channels other than normative ones.

            >That is, it is not appropriate for a Diocese, a Bishops' Conference, or any other ecclesial structure to constantly and officially enable procedures or rituals for all kinds of matters
            > in opposition to 2000 years of church teaching." talk about fricking distinction without a difference.
            There is still a difference. He's toeing the line, but staying just this side. That's his intention, and it's a load of crap, but what can you do? It's not heresy explicitly

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >"pastoral" means.
            You aren't Catholic, so you don't know it does mean what I just said.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's no use, Catholics literally cannot read.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            hard to say. i can't tell if they're the head in the sand kind, the homosexual kind, or if bergoglio simply succeeded in his plan to date.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            I read it. He literally said "bishops should not make blessings for same sex couples" which is what the krauts and belgians have been trying to do

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            No he didn't say that. He called for pastors to make the call individually on blessings for unions which cannot legally be called marriage in response section (e) here

            e) Therefore, pastoral prudence must adequately discern whether there are forms of blessing, requested by one or more persons, that do not convey a mistaken concept of marriage. For when a blessing is requested, it is expressing a plea to God for help, a supplication to live better, a trust in a Father who can help us live better.
            f) On the other hand, although there are situations that are not morally acceptable from an objective point of view, the same pastoral charity requires us not to simply treat as "sinners" other people whose guilt or responsibility may be mitigated by various factors affecting subjective accountability (Cf. St. John Paul II, Reconciliatio et paenitentia, 17).
            g) Decisions that may be part of pastoral prudence in certain circumstances should not necessarily become a norm. That is, it is not appropriate for a Diocese, a Bishops' Conference, or any other ecclesial structure to constantly and officially enable procedures or rituals for all kinds of matters, because not everything that "is part of a practical discernment in particular circumstances can be elevated to the level of a rule" as this "would lead to an intolerable casuistry" (Amoris laetitia, 304). Canon law should not and cannot cover everything, nor should Episcopal Conferences with their varied documents and protocols claim to do so, as the life of the Church flows through many channels other than normative ones.

            I'm not going to argue with you beyond pointing to the words themselves.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            which you don't seem to understand or are choosing to ignore.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >He called for pastors to make the call individually on blessings for unions
            He doesn't say for unions. He explicitly avoids it. I'm not saying that Francis is a good pope, but he never said "for unions"

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            He still referenced unions without saying the words. You rape language itself to avoid making the inference, that's why I won't argue with you. Too infuriating.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Take it up with Frank. He does rape language, I agree. I'm just recognizing the rape for what it is.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not my problem.

  9. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Not my Christianity.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Not my Christianity.
      Only Catholics are Christian.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Whatever.
        Whatever this shit is: accepting satanic degeneracy in the name of God or Jesus - is NOT my Christianity, at all. And never will be. End of story.

  10. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    So now that Catholics are going the way of the Methodists, Presbyterians, and other heretical protestants, I suppose that makes Orthodox, anathema SSPX and Calvinist/Reformed churches the last bastions of Christianity.

    Which way will you go, white man?

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >So now that Catholics are going the way of the Methodists, Presbyterians, and other heretical protestant
      But nothing changed. Hello. Stop splurging over a fake news headline. Have you people learned nothing over the past decade?

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        Not fake news. Get of /misc/ for five minutes and look.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          Hes right though. Not one priest has dared to make this change (at least publicly) here. Secretly they all shun it. And if they did make the change, they would lose most of their congregation overnight.
          I go to church every Sunday morning.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            >if the pope said gays can't get married but we do respect the autonomy of people to exercise free will in a civil union everyone would stop being catholic
            lmao no they wouldn't, latins are the dumbest coping Black folk on the planet. he could give them gay marriage and female priests and it would still take 6 months of "deep prayer" for a catholic to wake the frick up to the absolute state of their church.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            it's worse than that. he's evil, but he ain't fricking stupid. he's doing all of this with a very soft touch and a slow burn. the proble is that most catholics and everybody else don't study catechism nor canon law nor anything else. so when something like an apostolic constitution like Praedicate Evangelium comes down, they're all "oh, he changed some names. so?" that fricking decree, the strongest there is and can sometimes rise to the level of infallibility just laid the foundation to utterly gut church doctrine. it reoganizes many import "congregations", i.e., groups of cardinals, into "dicasteries". including the former congregation of the doctrine of the faith (formerly the holy office of the inquisition. by making that, the highest body for church doctrine, he's opened it to the laiety. yup. should bergogilo want to, he can appoint some twonk off the street, not a priest, nor a bishop, nor a cardinal, to participate in settling church doctrine. same thing with the "synod on synodality", which goes so far as no have invited both the laiety and non-catholics to make "recommendations" about changing for "the modern world". to these ends he's installed homosexuals and heretics, sidelined traditionalists, and even gone so far as to deauthorize celebration of the tridentine mass by priests ordained after 1962 unless they get special permission from him. not just their local bishops. he's a slipper jesuit infiltrator bent on making vatican ii look like the last supper.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Not fake news.
          Of course it's fake news, as I've explained. But you go keep pretending something impossible for 2,000 years just changed.

  11. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because its about worshiping israelites you dope

  12. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    It’s a desperate last ditch attempt to hold onto the scraps of power and relevance they have left in increasingly secular societies.

  13. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    https://www.twitch.tv/gregorysmith1974a

    > https://sourceforge.net/p/chaosesqueanthology/tickets/2/
    > https://sourceforge.net/p/chaosesqueanthology/code-t3d_attempt_engine/ci/master/tree/

  14. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    the bishop of rome is just another heretic. there's millions and millions of them. and every single one of them aren't half as moronic as any atheist.

  15. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    because at the end of the day it's a business, and if the israelite's programming is turning each progressive generation into homosexuals, the christian churches must submit, it'll keep getting worse until you cut off the head of the problem.

  16. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Because it's a corporation, the first one and the oldest.

  17. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Catholics are lost. Like, literally Sodom and Gomorrah? You do read the same Bible I do, right?

  18. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    When did the pope turn into a Chinaman?

  19. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    https://www.npr.org/2023/10/03/1203170334/pope-suggests-blessings-for-same-sex-unions-may-be-possible

    Here's the article, but I can't find the letter that they're talking about on the Vatican website. Link?

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Found it.
      https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-10/pope-francis-responds-to-dubia-of-five-cardinals.html
      There's a link to the original letter but it's in Spanish.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-10/pope-francis-responds-to-dubia-of-five-cardinals.html

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      Found it.
      https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-10/pope-francis-responds-to-dubia-of-five-cardinals.html
      There's a link to the original letter but it's in Spanish.

      >the media lies and hates Christianity
      >uses media as a source
      Those media sources are basing their articles on pure speculation
      In reality, the synod and the pope just re-affirmed the definition of marriage is between man and woman.
      It was also released that any pastor or bishop saying otherwise would need to repent and stop telling their congregation otherwise.
      The pope also released notes saying the magisterium isn't above the word of God.

      No where in any of those synod notes have they said they're going to bless the same sex unions. So that's not even on the radar for things they're looking into. Those articles are likely statements from heretical groups that hope that stuff happens (like Catholics for Abortion and whatnot).
      It doesn't match reality.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Those media sources are basing their articles on pure speculation
        Why do israelites lie so much?

  20. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >for the same reason pol is.
    Jews and homosexuals infiltrating and ruining from the inside.

  21. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    He literally said the opposite. It's being affirmed in the synod.
    Lots of ~~*lies*~~ going on recently.

  22. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >why
    Because lucifer and its minions have infiltrated and taken control

  23. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Christianity
    >Pope
    Pick one. Current pope is the false pope, literally going against everything in the bible.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *