VATICAN CITY, April 21 (Reuters) - Pope Francis, the first Latin American leader of the Roman Catholic Church, has died, the Vatican said in a video statement on Monday, ending an often turbulent reign marked by division and tension as he sought to overhaul the hidebound institution. He was 88, and had recently survived a serious bout of double pneumonia.
"Dear brothers and sisters, it is with profound sadness I must announce the death of our Holy Father Francis," Cardinal Kevin Farrell announced on the Vatican's TV channel.
"At 7:35 this morning the Bishop of Rome, Francis, returned to the house of the Father."
Jorge Mario Bergoglio was elected pope on March 13, 2013, surprising many Church watchers who had seen the Argentine cleric, known for his concern for the poor, as an outsider.
He sought to project simplicity into the grand role and never took possession of the ornate papal apartments in the Apostolic Palace used by his predecessors, saying he preferred to live in a community setting for his "psychological health".
He inherited a Church that was under attack over a child sex abuse scandal and torn by infighting in the Vatican bureaucracy, and was elected with a clear mandate to restore order.
But as his papacy progressed, he faced fierce criticism from conservatives, who accused him of trashing cherished traditions. He also drew the ire of progressives, who felt he should have done much more to reshape the 2,000-year-old Church.
While he struggled with internal dissent, Francis became a global superstar, drawing huge crowds on his many foreign travels as he tirelessly promoted interfaith dialogue and peace, taking the side of the marginalised, such as migrants.
Unique in modern times, there were two men wearing white in the Vatican for much of Francis' rule, with his predecessor Benedict opting to continue to live in the Holy See after his shock resignation in 2013 had opened the way for a new pontiff.
Benedict, a hero of the conservative cause, died in December 2022, finally leaving Francis alone on the papal stage.
Francis appointed nearly 80% of the cardinal electors who will choose the next pope correct as of February 2025, increasing the possibility that his successor will continue his progressive policies, despite the strong pushback from traditionalists.
[ Please go to EDIT section below ]
Comrades, I am new to Marxism-Leninism and disappointed with the unproductive disrespect in this thread. Just as Russia could not be fixed in a few years, so the Catholic Church could not be fixed in twelve years. Just as anticommunist lunatics grossly exaggerate, decontextualize and lie about the errors of Stalin while downplaying the (awesome) achievements of the USSR, people here exaggerate and obsess about the limits of Pope Francis and the problems that still exist in the Church.
This is bad for class consciousness. Most of the working class is religious, and in the West that religion is Christianity. Here in Brazil, about 90% of the population is Christian and most are Catholic. One of the strongest right-wing disinformation is the narrative that "atheist elites want to take power and repress the Church" and you are handing over that debate on a silver platter.
Historical context! The Bolshevik disliked, even repressed, the Russian Orthodox Church because it was hard to discern where did the czarist State end and where did the Church begin. The Bolshevik may even have exaggerated, acting out of hatred -- just as the victims of Nazism sometimes acted out of (understandable) anti-German hatred, instead of focusing their indignation on Nazis (not all Germans).
But while Christianity is still gravely theocratic today, it is considerably less so than czarist Orthodox Church. Please focus your attacks on theocracy, not Christianity [or religion]. While anti-Christian sentiment was somewhat understandable during the Bolshevik revolution and the early years of the USSR, it is anachronic today.
This thread looks more like "new atheist" juvenile contrarianism than responsible communists who actually raise class consciousness to overthrow capitalism. You should know that New Atheism is terribly right wing, decidedly anticommunist, and cheerleads for mass murdering wars of aggression in the Middle East.
EDIT (please read)
I messed up. I misunderstood Hexbear, wrote a confusing comment, unintentionally offended you, then reacted badly to your angry replies, many of which misrepresented what I wanted to say. Now with hindsight, I ask you to read this:
I did not mean to accuse hexbearites of being bad like New Atheists. I wanted to use the antisocial behavior of New Atheists (fruitless anti-religious intolerance) as an anti-example. In my experience, leftists discern between “theocrat” and “religious comrade". I felt this thread was an outlier. But then I worded my comment in an confusing way, appearing to conflate you with New Atheists.
The accusation of loving war crimes in the Middle East is for foaming lunatic New Atheists like Sam Harris, not Hexbearites.
I meant that anti-religious bashing is easily misrepresented by right wing propaganda. I explicitly said that the “atheist elites” narrative is disinformation. Cubans practice their religions in peace, just not theocracy.
I did not mean all “true” Christians are Catholics or whatever.
I am a newbie and autistic (actual diagnosis). I care a lot for detail and took offense with misrepresentations. And I am still getting up to speed with the LGBT movement.
Today I realized this analogy. When Rede Globo (massive right-wing media corporation) sheds tears for "democracy", I wish them go pound sand. They supported the military dictatorship for decades, and still distort reality in favor of capitalism, NATO, and Israel. Becoming softer is not enough. I would forgive them if they actually switched sides.
So I can relate to trans people who look at the historical crimes of organized religion (such as the Catholic Church), and who suffer religious hate even today, saying they will only respect the Catholic Church if she actually switches sides. Malcom X said: stop sweet talking!
While I appreciate your critique, I have to object to one thing: the Catholic Church is not Christianity as a whole. It is a political organization that represents the religion, but it is not omnipotent of the religion.
And as political organization, it has done a LOT of bad shit in its very, very long history.
Just as people point out that ISIS, Al-Qaeda, or even Saudi Arabia is not representative of all of Islam, neither is the Catholic Church, the Church of England, or any Christian organization at that.
It has also historically been used by the bourgeoisie, and the aristocracy before them, to legitimize and maintain their class dictatorship (as you already pointed out, Tsarist Russia is a very example of that but for the Orthodox Church), so it is not out of line to include religious organizations in critiques of Capitalism.
I believe most folks here are (rightfully) trashing the Church, not every single person who holds Christian beliefs.
Hi. I did not mean that all "true" Christians are Catholics or whatever someone might have interpreted. I do think that attacking the entire Catholic Church instead of attacking just Catholic theocrats is analogous to attacking Christianity instead of just Christian theocrats.
But I still believe it can continue to exist as the Catholic Church but be prevented from messing with secular politics. I am not sure that was your point, but you seem to think that the Catholic Church is inherently a "political" (secular politics) arm of Christianity. That is not my view. Let's not litigate this specific claim (not the focus of this forum), I just want to clarify that is not my view.
This is what I was objecting to. I fail to see how attacking the Catholic Church is an affront to every Christian, especially when some comrades on this forum are Christian and share these critiques too.
When I said “the Catholic Church is not Christianity as a whole” I mean that bashing the Church for the reactionary stuff it does or says is not analogous to bashing Christianity in general. When the Pope gets called out by us for saying something like “gender ideology is the most dangerous thing in society”, that doesn’t mean EVERY Christian holds that view or should be associated with what the Pope says (unless they are in the Church themselves, then they should be held accountable).
Also, can you define “Christian theocrat” for me? I’m having a hard time seeing how that isn’t any different to the Catholic Church (which is LITERALLY a theocratic institution).
No, I do not see the Catholic Church as “secular”, it is by its nature a theocratic organization. The “political” part comes from the fact that it wields power in the state (through the Vatican, but also historically through governments that pledge allegiance to the Church) to enact its theocratic ideas and policies on the masses. To give modern comparisons, it is comparable to the clerics who hold power in the Islamic Republic of Iran, or the British Monarch being the figurehead of the Church of England.
Do I believe that religious organizations can be prevented from interfering in secular politics? Yes, as long as they don’t gain power. China is a good example of a ML state that has prevented this while still allowing people to congregate in religious orgs by making sure they are all approved and regulated by the Communist Party.