VATICAN CITY (CNS) – People who act shocked that a priest would bless a gay couple but have no problem with him blessing a crooked businessman are hypocrites, Pope Francis said.

“The most serious sins are those that are disguised with a more ‘angelic’ appearance. No one is scandalized if I give a blessing to an entrepreneur who perhaps exploits people, which is a very serious sin. Whereas they are scandalized if I give it to a homosexual – this is hypocrisy,” he told the Italian magazine Credere.

The interview was scheduled for publication Feb. 8, but Vatican News reported on some of its content the day before when the magazine issued a press release about the interview.

  • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    184
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    A less hypocritical Catholic Church would be nice. I wish Francis luck, he’ll need it to push the right wing of the church to be less shitty.

        • Matriks404@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          41
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I am an (agnostic) atheist, but let’s be clear: not all priests are pedophiles, this is a huge exaggeration. But I still think they should be able to marry and have children, like normal people. And I believe that this would at least stop some of them doing pedophilic acts.

          • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            40
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            Pedos are going to pedo, but if you only recruit from an audience of people that are actively trying to avoid romantic adult relationships, I imagine going to have a higher percentage of pedos in that group.

            By allowing priests to marry, be LGBTQ+, etc, you’re going to have fewer open seats at the alter for pedos.

            • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              I would even challenge that pedos are going to pedo. Obviously there’s no research on this, but are pedos only attracted to children? Are all pedophiles also rapists? I find that hard to believe. I think that “child molesting priests” are an intersection of priest, pedophile, rapist, and sexually frustrated.

              • kase@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                10 months ago

                If the wikipedia page is accurate: some pedophiles are only attracted to children ("exclusive pedophiles), but some are also attracted to adults; and not all pedophiles commit rape.

              • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                10 months ago

                No, not all pedophile are rapist but almost all consume materials that were produced by raping children. One problem is that there are only a few programs that actually targeting helping pedophiles to deal with their condition. So we leave them on their own to figure out how to deal with their condition.

                • jol@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Big [ citation needed ] there that triggers my BS sensors. CP is a huge problem but it’s literally impossible to know if “most consume materials” like that. Not defending pedophiles in any form, but hate bad logic.

                • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  but almost all consume materials that were produced by raping children.

                  So what’s your take on lolicon?

                  • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Depends on if it’s more a substitute or a trigger. I personally don’t know of any conclusive research on this topic. But people consuming lolicon defenetly need psychological help, don’t think it’s a healthy fantasy no matter how to look on it.

          • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            10 months ago

            It would also help if church would actually punish (by assisting police investigation) and kick out offenders instead of covering up and moving them around.

        • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          10 months ago

          Free room and board? They don’t even hold you to a vow of poverty, the Monsignor at my (former) diocese drove a Mercedes, just like Jesus would have wanted for him.

        • Marin_Rider@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          if thats why you think people become priests, I’m more concerned that you consider child rape to be an incentive.

    • thefartographer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      10 months ago

      They started the Church of England so that the king could get a divorce. Now they’re probably gonna start the Church of New England to force their wives to stay with their toxic asses.

          • MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            10 months ago

            It was settled mainly by Puritans, a Calvinist flavor of Christians that thought the Church of England was too Catholic. If you’ve heard the term “puritanical” it comes from them.

            The pilgrims specifically, were the sect that was the first to land in Massachusetts, and sought to break away from the Church of England.

          • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            10 months ago

            The basics are that the first colonies were created by a splinter faction of the Church of England known as the Puritans. There were other Puritan groups who formed colonies in New England, but the Pilgrims are the group most people think of when talking about the birth of the US, who were distinct from other groups of Puritans for pushing for complete separation from the Church of England. The Puritans basically believed that the Church of England didn’t go far enough in separating from the Catholic Church.

            • hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Thanks for the explanation! I knew about the Puritans in the sense that I knew they were influential in the early days of the US and were known for being… err, pretty uptight, but that’s honestly all I could remember from high school history classes I took about 3000 years ago.

              • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                10 months ago

                To be honest, despite my hometown being one town over from their original landing site (iirc, not technically where they first landed, but where they actually disembarked), I had to look them up because all I could really remember about them is that I tend to call them “a bunch of never-nude prudes.”

                I’m still not exactly clear on what their issues with the Church of England were, but I was surprised to learn that they were apparently pretty against slavery, especially for the time period. Slaves made up like 3% of their total workforce and had almost all the same rights recognized by the government as any other citizen, apparently.

                • hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  So, I fell in to a wiki-hole (help) – so far I only know that they were cranky about how the English Reformation didn’t go far enough, and coincidentally that Oliver Cromwell was a Puritan, but no specifics yet