The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy • Hacker News Board

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#311

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 1:20 PM UTC

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #155

Avicebron wrote: post #3

Idk which is more impressive that someone referenced the Avignon Papacy in a heat of the moment argument or that the same person who could reference that thought it was a good idea. (Not Catholic...but like...why?)

There's this weird affect of modern "trad" catholic converts. Not everyone who's an adult convert acts this way, but most converts obsessed with "trad" aesthetics seem to be. They obsess over the law, doctrine, and history of the Catholic church. Invoking events from millennia prior, and despite converting to Catholicism by choice, will denounce the Pope for being woke or what have you, insisting it's not the true Ca…

> Why convert to the branch of Christianity with the elected god-king if you don't want to listen to the elected god-king?

Maybe they just want to indulge in eating human flesh and blood? (AFAIK, Catholicism includes the belief that during Communion, the bread and wine literally transform into the flesh and blood of Jesus).

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#312

Post by ndsipa_pomu » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 1:30 PM UTC

anonu wrote: post #50

There is a lot to source from Christian ideals, many of which are the foundations of Western culture: human dignity, moral equality, conscience, limits on power and care for those less fortunate and weaker. Much of what is happening in the world today feels like a stark reversal of those ideals: selfishness and divisiveness manufactured to promote a narrow segment of society. Recent news articles have indicated an in…

There's a big difference between the Christian ideals and the practices of organised Christian churches. The acquisition of wealth and power seemed to be a major goal for organised Christianity through to the Middle Ages. My opinion is that Christianity held back human civilisation for maybe a thousand years with their doctrine (c.f. Copernicus).

As an atheist, I find it grating to hear people talking about only the idealistic side of Christianity and ignoring all the wars, torture and denigration of people that it caused. Of course, other religions are also responsible for a lot of the same sins.

That said, I do have respect for the teachings of Jesus - he seemed to be very much into socialism and very anti-Captialist.

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#313

Post by twodave » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #284

twodave wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He certainly has his critics, but in my view it’s absurd to place him next to the Crusades, Inquisition, et al…

Consider that Paul's misogynist (albeit commonplace for the time) views on women have probably been responsible for the abuse, rape and killing of more women than men were killed in the Crusades, and his views on slavery were used to justify the practice for centuries, including in its most brutal manifestation in the US. The Crusades and Inquisition, bad as they were, were also limited in space and time. Paul's word…

This is a rather unbalanced perspective that lacks a shred of evidence. I can't imagine that you've actually read his letters, because if you had you'd know his stance on the role of a husband is not remotely what you've described.

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#314

Post by twodave » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 1:40 PM UTC

croes wrote: post #281

twodave wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He certainly has his critics, but in my view it’s absurd to place him next to the Crusades, Inquisition, et al…

Paul changed the focus of Jesus‘ message of love to Jesus‘ death and resurrection. https://ehrmanblog.org/the-messages-of-jesus-and-paul-basica...

Having read the Bible several times through, I don't see any disagreement between Jesus and Paul. This is further supported by the fact that the original disciples/apostles accepted Paul's teachings. And if there were a disagreement on the nature of salvation I assume things like circumcision would have taken a back seat to that debate, yet that is not what we find in either Acts or any of the letters of the apostles in the New Testament. So, I think the view that Paul somehow subverted Christianity is a self-deceiving one designed to reinforce previously-held beliefs.

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#315

Post by krapp » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 1:59 PM UTC

twodave wrote: post #313

krapp wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider that Paul's misogynist (albeit commonplace for the time) views on women have probably been responsible for the abuse, rape and killing of more women than men were killed in the Crusades, and his views on slavery were used to justify the practice for centuries, including in its most brutal manifestation in the US. The Crusades and Inquisition, bad as they were, were also limited in space and time. Paul's word…

This is a rather unbalanced perspective that lacks a shred of evidence. I can't imagine that you've actually read his letters, because if you had you'd know his stance on the role of a husband is not remotely what you've described.

I have read them. Let me quote from one of them:

    A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing — if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. (1 Timothy 2:11–15)

It doesn't really matter what Paul says on the role of the husband, when he makes explicit his belief that women should be subservient because of some ontological inferiority on their part through Eve, and that the only value a woman has is in childbearing.

Saying a slave should obey their master doesn't ameliorate the moral evil that is slavery, and saying a husband should "love their wives as Christ loved the church" doesn't ameliorate misogyny. Paul doesn't believe men and women are equal, nor that they deserve equal rights, and thus neither has Christendom for most of its existence.

And the evidence is everywhere, in the two thousand years of law and culture based on the religion. Christian opposition to womens' rights and suffrage, divorce and non-heterosexual relationships. Laws forbidding women to work or own property, judges deciding that rape cannot exist within marriage because a woman's duty is to please her husband, husbands abusing their wives when they don't "know their place." And of course banning women from any position of power in the church. All of these are the consequences of Pauline principles.

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#316

Post by sillyfluke » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 2:02 PM UTC

jmmcd wrote: post #62

stratocumulus0 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly my observation. Every now and then there's an Anglo posting on Polish social media asking people questions about some obscure Catholic doctrines and getting offended after they're told that no one there cares. I guess that such people see the number "98% Catholic" on the page for Poland on Wikipedia and conclude that it must be some medieval tradcath white nationalist theocracy. I am deeply skeptical…

> Anglo Please, write US-American. These people are not coming from any other place.

This comment is amusing considering Tony Blair was one of those notable weird politician converts.

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#317

Post by fabianholzer » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 2:08 PM UTC

fhdkweig wrote: post #196

CGMthrowaway wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's way too much misdirected emphasis on the pope and ecclesiastical hierarchy imo. I wouldn't think too hard about it. You can be catholic and not like the pope just the same as you can be french and not like the king. Or american and not like the president. There is only one divinity on earth today and that's the holy spirit (consubstantial with the father and son), indwelling and guiding humanity on many level…

> You can be catholic and not like the pope I come from a Protestant background, so I view Catholicism as just Protestants with a pope. What does it mean to be catholic but without a pope?

Probably to be a high-church Anglican/episcopalian?

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#318

Post by sqircles » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 2:48 PM UTC

CGMthrowaway wrote: post #289

sqircles wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I develop my relationship with god in a way that is helped by worship through the church, but is not dependent on it. The Church certainly disagrees with you, teaching that the visible Church is the ordinary means of salvation and full communion with Christ. (see the Precepts, CCC ~846–848)

The Church can do that, assuming you are interpreting it correctly, which is questionable. I dont know how someone online can tell me definitely whether I will be saved or not though. And Matthew 18:20

I'm not speaking to your personal salvation. I'm speaking in context of what the Catholic Church teaches is required for salvation, as that is the context of this comment thread - take that as you will. The Church (big C, as in the Catholic Church) teaches "infallibly," so if you are a Catholic it really is not up for debate, that there is no salvation outside of Christ AND the Church. That includes the 5 precepts of the Catholic Church - or minimum "laws" you must follow as a Catholic, 4 of which are dependent on the Church itself: attending Mass on Sundays/Holy Days, annual confession at a minimum, receiving Eucharist during Easter, observe fasting/abstaining days, and providing for the Church's needs. Therefore, quite simply, if a Catholic makes the statement "I develop my relationship with god in a way that is helped by worship through the church, but is not dependent on it" that is a direct conflict [0].

I'm not even sure from what position you are arguing from, but both of those statements (relationship with God supported by a visible church rather than requiring it, and Matthew 18:20) are fundamental arguments for Protestantism.

[0] https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/is-there-re...

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#319

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 2:52 PM UTC

Avicebron wrote: post #3

Idk which is more impressive that someone referenced the Avignon Papacy in a heat of the moment argument or that the same person who could reference that thought it was a good idea. (Not Catholic...but like...why?)

I mean, summoning a diplomat to issue threats is usually the opposite of “heat of the moment”, but...

Re: The Pentagon Threatened Pope Leo XIV's Ambassador with the Avignon Papacy

#320

Post by pavel_lishin » Fri, Apr 10, 2026, 3:19 PM UTC

CamperBob2 wrote: post #220

Teever wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’d be surprised. A lot of religious people are extremely knowledgeable about historical stuff related to their religions. They might draw the absolutely worst conclusions from their historical knowledge and have incredibly biased takes but they’ve actually read and discussed these things which is more than you can say for your average person. It ultimately comes from their personal identify being so intricately ti…

Best analogy for religion I've ever heard: "A D&D game that went too far." If you've seen diehard gamers go on for hours about the minutiae of various editions of countless rulebooks, you can imagine what it's like when devout Catholics get together to talk shop. There are subtleties to this particular pissing match that aren't immediately obvious. The Vatican is starting to rein in the Opus Dei cult-within-a-cult. A…

Funny, that's how I tend to view my religious Jewish friends. I have a few Catholic friends, and I feel like I never have conversations about the technicalities of their religious views, but it comes up more with my Jewish friends, and it's always basically as much fun to chat about that with them as it is to chat about D&D with my D&D friends (which is a lot!)