#pope division?

[mensiscollar]

well it better be black and it better be tight and it better be just my size

[scrunchie-face]

Sometimes I wish I didn’t care about anything

[queerprayers]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judensau

luther inspired hitler, following him is a step away from following hitler

Welcome, beloved. I don't want to dismiss your message, but I do want to make some things clear. I, like many, have horrors in my religion that I have to be able to address, and prejudices that I do not perpetuate consciously but know that I nonetheless have absorbed from culture, and am responsible for healing. Antisemitism within Christianity is a huge topic, with people devoting their lives to studying it. I would not fault any Jewish person for antagonism toward my communities--you would be right to be wary, and if I intend to continue participating in these communities, I must be able to understand and accept any justified anger or distrust coming my way.

I'd encourage everyone reading to learn more about this through the Wikipedia link, but a brief description/summary for those who don't want details/images: The mentioned article is about an antisemitic artistic trope from the Middle Ages. The church where Martin Luther preached included an image of this sort from 1305.

Martin Luther was antisemitic. This isn't up for debate. There is more to say, of course--we can look at how his attitudes changed over his life (for the worse, to be clear), we can talk about the extent to which he specifically influenced Nazism (this is a complicated conversation that I'm not qualified for)--but he was undeniably, horrifically, antisemitic. There's a Wikipedia page solely devoted to this topic.

That said, there's huge diversity within Lutheranism, seeing as it's a large religious tradition, and if you're interested in learning about Lutheranism and Hitler specifically, I'd encourage you to look into the split within the German Lutheran Church in 1933 and Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the Lutheran theologian who was hanged at the Flossenbürg concentration camp. It's fascinating to look back at that while living through such religious division in America right now.

Luther was a complicated man, who did not set out to found a church, and opposed the term "Lutheran." He was attempting to reform the Catholic Church from the inside, because he himself was Catholic. Not a very good one, obviously, but he didn't consider himself anything else. He was a monk for a time, then an academic, and his beliefs got him excommunicated. I've read some of his writings, but not all. I find value in them, while disagreeing with a lot of it. Lutheranism is a space with which I have fellowship with God and humanity, not a set of rules or a devotion to every word of a man from the 16th century. I'm not interested in excusing or defending him, nor do I feel the need to honor him in any way. I hope I disappoint him completely.

I am a Lutheran Christian--and I would not fault anyone for thinking those words function similarly. So to explain: I'm a Christian as in I follow Christ, devote myself to his teachings, pray to him, and live for him every day. I'm a Lutheran as in I am a member of a church and culture that traces back to communities of German Protestants who identified with the theology of Martin Luther. I do not follow Martin Luther. I do not follow Lutheranism. I follow God, and participate in Christianity often within Lutheran communities--primarily because of my heritage and the music.

Protestants don't have Saints in the Catholic sense, nor do we have a pope. Martin Luther is not our Saint, or someone we pray through, or our leader. We don't read his writings in church, we don't look to him for answers. He's someone many people have found wisdom in, someone who has inspired countless reformers, but he is a man. A saint in the Lutheran sense, a lowercase-s saint, a member of Christ's community--a sinner from his mother's womb. He probably wrote more about his own sin then you ever will. He devolved into conspiracy, and said horrible things about Judaism and Catholicism and Islam, and we have seen the legacy of German antisemitism (which he did not create, but obviously contributed to), and it's a good thing I don't idolize him. I honestly don't think about him very much. Yes, I read his catechism in Bible classes, but we were free to disagree with it--we were using his most basic writings as a starting point. The words of his that are most present in my life are his hymns, which we do sing often. His teachings were intended to lead people to the Bible rather than leaders/traditions, which is why he translated the Bible into German, and why I go to the Bible, not to him. I learned about his antisemitism growing up, and prayed for repentance on behalf of my ancestors.

There are people who hold Luther in higher esteem than me, to be sure. Do I think they're basically following Hitler? I don't know. It depends why they value him, I would say. Idolizing anyone is dangerous, especially men in the 1500s. I can think of no historical male writer I value that was not at least slightly misogynist. The two authors I've read today, Virginia Woolf and Shakespeare, both have antisemitic writing. Countless people sainted by the Catholic Church, and countless popes, have been antisemitic. There is no innocent tradition. I'm not trying to excuse any of this, or say we shouldn't be critical, but this is why we don't base religions on people. They have to be founded and organized by people, which means there's going to be issues (and Christianity's are quite obvious), but Christians have to remind ourselves every day that the only human we worship is the one who was God.

I wish you well, beloved. I'm glad you see the evil in my religion, genuinely. Not enough people do. I hope you continue educating people and being active in your fight against antisemitism--if you're not Jewish yourself, hopefully this shows up more as supporting Jewish people and communities, and less like borderline accusing people online for following Hitler because they still use the word for their traditions that their Norwegian great-grandparents did, because it's the word that stuck from the beginning. We're named after Luther's excommunication, not his antisemitism--Catholics would have had to change their name to Lutheran too if that was the theological issue happening. There's a whole conversation to be had on whether we should call ourselves Lutheran, but regardless, the communities and heritage exist, and will continue to evolve.

May God have mercy on the crimes of my community members. May God lead me to walk in the way of justice. May our religion serve us, and may we serve God.

<3 Johanna

[foone]

Speaking of Popes, I've always said the cafeteria in the Dimensional Nexus is honestly the best place for casual conversation with your fellow agents. You'll always hear about some amazing situation in some alternate timeline, parallel earth, or other dimension (and I assume you understand the distinctions between those).

I was talking to Robert (a 3rd tech from the parareligious research division) last week and she showed me a news photo article from her assigned world. The photo showed the Pope and two of her wives getting off the boat to Leningrad (part of the religious equivalent of a world tour, apparently). When I asked her how that was possible, she only said "Vatican 4 was a real doozy!" between giggles.

And see? Just that kind of entertainment alone more than makes up for the fucking sandwiches.

[apod]

2024 February 29

Julius Caesar and Leap Days Image Credit & License: Classical Numismatic Group, Inc., Wikimedia

Explanation: In 46 BC Julius Caesar reformed the calendar system. Based on advice by astronomer Sosigenes of Alexandria, the Julian calendar included one leap day every four years to account for the fact that an Earth year is slightly more than 365 days long. In modern terms, the time it takes for the planet to orbit the Sun once is 365.24219 mean solar days. So if calendar years contained exactly 365 days they would drift from the Earth's year by about 1 day every 4 years and eventually July (named for Julius Caesar himself) would occur during the northern hemisphere winter. By adopting a leap year with an extra day every four years, the Julian calendar year would drift much less. In 1582 Pope Gregory XIII provided the further fine-tuning that leap days should not occur in years ending in 00, unless divisible by 400. This Gregorian Calendar system is the one in wide use today. Of course, tidal friction in the Earth-Moon system slows Earth's rotation and gradually lengthens the day by about 1.4 milliseconds per century. That means that leap days like today will not be necessary, about 4 million years from now. This Roman silver coin, a denarius, depicts Julius Caesar (left) and Venus, Roman goddess of love.

∞ Source: apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap240229.html

[paula-of-christ]

In regards to the person who sent me an anon who was butthurt about me making a joke about the SSPX having modernist ideas, you are incorrect <3

The SSPX was founded on the premise of sedevacantism and while the group at large formally rejects sedevacantism now, it's also a very recent group and Lefevre died as a sede, not being in communion with Rome. I will not be reading his flawed views because I submit to Rome, as is my duty as a Catholic.

Also, your point of "there are sedevacantists at Novus Ordo parishes!!!" No there isn't. Sedevacantists wouldn't be going to a Novus Ordo parish because they don't believe that the Novus Ordo is a valid form of the Mass. There are modernists in 'progressive' Novus Ordo churches that don't care what the pope or magisterium do. And the fact that they look like sedevacantists only proves my point in comparing sedevacantism to the heresy of modernism.

But also, and read this part again and again until you understand: the point of it on my blog is because it is a joke. Someone who is offended that I don't agree with radtrads that go against the magisterium or progressive liberals who ALSO go against the magisterium, is themselves divisive and ought to repent. It was also put on my blog before the SSPX was formally "allowed" in the Church (which isn't even true, hence why I put it in quotes). You can't separate sedevacantism from the SSPX because otherwise, the SSPX and FSSP would be the same group, and they aren't.

Not to mention, the SSPX having and electing their own bishops of regions, rather than submitting to the bishop that was appointed to them BY THE POPE and following the rule of the actual bishop(s) of their region. Even if they pray for Pope Francis in their version of the Mass and call him Holy Father, they do not in PRACTICE submit to Rome due to the belief that 'they know better' which is in tandem with the heresy of modernism, that the lay people know more than the magisterium and the Church needs to 'get with the times'.

[deadpanwalking]

“I do not minimise the services of modern poets in exploiting the possibilities of rhymeless verse. They prove the strength of a Movement, the utility of a Theory. What neither Blake nor Arnold could do alone is being done in our time. ‘Blank verse’ is the only accepted rhymeless verse in English – the inevitable iambic pentameter. The English ear is (or was) more sensitive to the music of the verse and less dependent upon the recurrence of identical sounds in this metre than in any other. There is no campaign against rhyme. But it is possible that excessive devotion to rhyme has thickened the modern ear. The rejection of rhyme is not a leap at facility; on the contrary, it imposes a much severer strain upon the language. When the comforting echo of rhyme is removed, success or failure in the choice of words, in the sentence structure, in the order, is at once more apparent. Rhyme removed, the poet is at once held up to the standards of prose. Rhyme removed, much ethereal music leaps up from the word, music which has hitherto chirped unnoticed in the expanse of prose. Any rhyme forbidden, many Shagpats were unwigged.

And this liberation from rhyme might be as well a liberation of rhyme. Freed from its exacting task of supporting lame verse, it could be applied with greater effect where it is most needed. There are often passages in an unrhymed poem where rhyme is wanted for some special effect, for a sudden tightening-up, for a cumulative insistence, or for an abrupt change of mood. But formal rhymed verse will certainly not lose its place. We only need the coming of a Satirist – no man of genius is rarer – to prove that the heroic couplet has lost none of its edge since Dryden and Pope laid it down. As for the sonnet I am not so sure. But the decay of intricate formal patterns has nothing to do with the advent of vers libre. It had set in long before. Only in a closely-knit and homogenous society, where many men are at work on the same problems, such a society as those which produced the Greek chorus, the Elizabethan lyric, and the Troubadour canzone, will the development of such forms ever be carried to perfection. And as for vers libre, we conclude that it is not defined by absence of pattern or absence of rhyme, for other verse is without these; that it is not defined by non-existence of metre, since even the worst verse can be scanned; and we conclude that the division between Conservative Verse and vers libre does not exist, for there is only good verse, bad verse, and chaos.”

T.S. Eliot, from 'Reflections on Vers libre' (New Statesman, March 3, 1917)

[tomorrowusa]

David Tennant recently used language not often heard on Doctor Who and Good Omens which he aimed at transphobes.

David Tennant has once again made an impassioned declaration of support for the transgender community. In recent history, the Doctor Who actor has repeatedly made headlines thanks to his allyship towards trans and gender non-conforming people – most notably with a subtle gesture during a TV interview that wound up helping to raise £18,000 for the LGBTQ+ youth charity AKT. Over the weekend, David made an appearance at the Proud Nerd convention in Germany, where he was asked by a fan about his own “relationship with gender expression”, in light of his past support for trans people. As recorded in a viral TikTok that has already accrued more than half a million views, the former Broadchurch star said: “When I was a kid, the idea of being non-binary wasn’t something that existed. It wasn’t a concept. I’ve seen that emerge, and people are able to express themselves through that. It only ever seems positive as far as I can see.” Elaborating on the “weaponisation of trans rights”, he continued: “I remember, when I was a teenager, I remember gay rights being weaponised politically. And that always felt ugly and nasty, and now, we look back on that, 30 years later, and those people are clearly on the wrong side of history. “And now, there is a similar weaponisation of these topics being taken by mostly the right-wing, or certain sections of society, trying to create friction and conflict and division where it needn’t be. It’s just about people being themselves, you don’t need to be bothered about it.” “Fuck off and let people be,” he concluded, which was met with a round of applause from the room.

Another expression of support for the trans community has come from a more unusual source – Pope Francis.

How Pope Francis opened the Vatican to transgender sex workers

The outreach reflected an unconventional pope in the most radical stage of his papacy. From his early days in 2013, when he famously declared, “Who am I to judge,” Francis has urged the Catholic Church to embrace all comers, including those living in conflict with its teachings. Now, his unprecedented opening to the LGBTQ+ community has reached its zenith — and ballooned into the most explosive issue of his tenure, fueling a bitter clash with senior conservative clerics, who have denounced him in remarkably harsh terms. In recent months, Francis has given explicit approval for transgender godparents and blessings of same-sex couples. He penned a defense of secular civil unions — once described by his predecessor as “contrary to the common good.”

The pope has sometimes contradicted himself in this area. But his more recent actions apparently take precedence over his past words.

Pope Francis and David Tennant (who portrays a devil on Good Omens) find themselves on the opposite side of MAGA Republicans. In West Virginia, for example, candidates for the GOP nomination for governor are competing with each other to see who can be the most anti-trans.

West Virginia Governor’s Race Is a Battle of Who Can Be the Most Anti-Trans

The MAGA Republican Party finds itself on the wrong side of history in this area – as well as many other areas.

@neil-gaiman

[whencyclopedia]

The Siege of Damascus, 1148 CE

The siege of Damascus in 1148 CE was the final act of the Second Crusade (1147-1149 CE). Lasting a mere four days from 24 to 28 July, the siege by a combined western European army was not successful, and the Crusade petered out with its leaders returning home more bitter and angry with each other than the Muslim enemy. Additional crusades would follow, but the myth of invincibility of the western knights was shattered forever at the debacle of Damascus.

Background: The Second Crusade

The Second Crusade was a military campaign organised by the Pope and European nobles to recapture the city of Edessa in Mesopotamia, which had fallen in 1144 CE to the Muslim Seljuk Turks. Edessa was an important commercial and cultural centre and had been in Christian hands since the First Crusade (1095-1102 CE). However, when Pope Eugenius III (r. 1145-1153 CE) formally called for a crusade on 1 December 1145 CE, the goals of the campaign were put somewhat vaguely as a broad appeal for the achievements of the First Crusade and Christians and holy relics in the Levant to be protected.

The Second Crusade included successful campaigns in the Iberian peninsula and the Baltic against Muslim Moors and pagan Europeans respectively, but it was the Levant that remained the focus of Christianity's holy war. The Crusader army in the Middle East, numbering some 60,000 men, was led by the German king Conrad III (r. 1138-1152 CE) and Louis VII, the king of France (r. 1137-1180 CE). Just as in the First Crusade, the bulk of the army travelled via Constantinople where they were met with misgivings by the Byzantines and their emperor Manuel I Komnenos (r. 1143 - 1180 CE). Manuel's primary concern was that the Crusaders were really only after the choice parts of the Byzantine Empire. Accordingly, Manuel insisted the leaders of the Crusade, on arrival in September and October 1147 CE, swear personal allegiance to him. At the same time, the western powers considered the Byzantines rather too preoccupied with their own affairs and unhelpful in the noble opportunities they thought a crusade presented. The old divisions between the eastern and western churches had not gone away either. It was significant that Manuel, despite the diplomacy, strengthened the fortifications of Constantinople and provided a military escort to see the Crusaders on their way as quickly as possible.

The German contingent of the crusader army, already having suffered significant losses during a terrible flash flood at their camp near Constantinople, ignored Manuel's advice to stick to the safety of the coast once in Asia Minor and so met another, even worse disaster. At Dorylaion, a force of Muslim Seljuk Turks caused havoc with the slow-moving westerners on 25 October 1147 CE, and, forced to retreat to Nicaea, Conrad himself was wounded but did eventually make it back to Constantinople.

Meanwhile, the army led by Louis VII, although shocked to hear of the Germans' failure, pressed on and managed to defeat a Seljuk army in December 1147 CE. The success was short-lived, though, for on 7 January 1148 CE the French were beaten badly in battle as they crossed the Cadmus Mountains. It was a disastrous opening to a campaign which had not even reached its target of northern Syria and a sorry tale of bad planning, poor logistics, and unheeded local advice.

Louis VII and his ravaged army finally arrived at Antioch in March 1148 CE. From there, he ignored Raymond of Antioch's proposal to fight in northern Syria and marched on to the south. In any case, a council of western leaders was convened at Acre, and the target of the Crusade was now selected, not at the already destroyed Edessa, but Muslim-held Damascus, the closest threat to Jerusalem and a prestigious prize given the city's history and wealth.

Continue reading...

[eesirachs]

catholicism has its teeth in me too and I would love to indulge butand I would love to indulge but the pope is so complicated for me he says one thing like marxists and christions have a common goal, and then the next-day he says gender theory is divisive whilst having plans for brunch with drag queens. how have you reconciled with these differences?

he is not god, he is a man beloved by god. and god has a tendency to love complicated men. men who kill, who lie, who do not understand sexual difference. i call him el papa with all the intentionality in the world: he is not the pope, he is the father. my father, your father. and one thing that fathers are going to do is get things wrong. let him love you anyway. name your frustrations with him. know better than to fall into the hate that elides from it all, the vatican i mean. peter, the first pope, makes it all visible. he is confused often, wrong oftener. he does not honor his wife. he falls asleep when jesus, edging towards dying, begs him not to. and yet he jumps into the sea, barely clothed, to embrace god. fathers are like that sometimes. i am trying to tell you that ideally, we move compassionately towards those who feel, at times, far from god. we wish god for them. we know their errors and we do not let them go un-named. that is the thing about forgiveness. we don't have to do it, and we don't have to reconcile anything: there is no rigidity in faith and fathers. we can not love and love at once

[disgruntledexplainer]

not-so-friendly reminder to so-called “catholic nazis”, that Hitler literally executed approximately 3,000 polish catholic priests over the course of the war for the crime of existing, 1,800 of which were executed in the concentration camps themselves, with the stated goal of squeezing the religion out of poland. He stated in his letters that he despised the teachings of the Church, and wanted it out of his territory. He established the Hexenkartothek, a sub-division of the SS explicitly founded to produce anti-catholic pro-pagan propaganda and promote witchcraft, which was overseen by Heinrich Himmler. He was an apostate who worked with pagans and heretics to murder millions of innocent people in the name of a blatantly secular regime, and he should have been burned at the stake.

oh yeah, not to mention that nazism was effectively condemned in Encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge by Pope Piux XI and Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli (later Pope Pius XII, meaning nazism was actually condemned by two popes in a row), meaning that if you are a “catholic nazi” you are every bit as heretical as a “pro-abortion catholic” or a “catholic communist”.

[coochiequeens]

It's not everyday this blog agrees with the Pope but when it comes to surrogacy we agree that it exploits women and babies.

Rome — Pope Francis on Monday called for surrogate motherhood to be banned worldwide, calling the practice of surrogacy "deplorable" and saying an unborn child "cannot be turned into an object of trafficking."

In a wide-ranging speech to ambassadors of the 184 countries that have diplomatic relations with the Vatican, the pope said surrogacy represented a grave violation of the dignity of the woman and the child and that it exploited surrogate mothers' financial circumstances.

Pope Francis leads the Angelus prayer at the Vatican, Jan. 7, 2024.VATICAN MEDIA/­HANDOUT VIA REUTERS

"A child is always a gift and never the basis of a commercial contract," Francis said.

In 2022, the pope called surrogacy "inhuman," saying "women, almost all poor, are exploited, and children are treated like goods."

Laws on surrogacy differ widely around the world. Only a few countries, and some states in the U.S., allow commercial surrogacy. Others allow "altruistic" surrogacy, where no money is exchanged.  Many other nations, including most in Europe, have banned it altogether.

Francis included surrogacy in his list of conflicts and divisions threatening world peace in his annual speech to the diplomat corps, sometimes referred to as the pontiff's "state of the world" address. This year he also reflected on the ongoing wars in the Gaza Strip and Ukraine, the immigration crisis, climate change, arms proliferation, antisemitism, the persecution of Christians and artificial intelligence, among other topics.

The pope said the wars in Gaza and Ukraine prove that all conflicts end up indiscriminately affecting civilian populations where they are fought. 

"We must not forget that grave violations of international humanitarian law are war crimes," he said.

[portraitsofsaints]

Pope St. Clement I of Rome 

35-99

Feast Day: November 23

Patronage: stonecutters, marble-workers, mariners, sailors, tanners, sick children

Saint Clement was an early successor to St. Peter, installed as Pope in the year 88 and one of the 5 Apostolic Fathers, who provide a direct link between the Apostles and later generations of the church fathers. He’s a contemporary of St. Paul and is mentioned in Philippians 4:3. St. Clement's  First Epistle to the Corinthians, condemned the unauthorized and unjustified division between the laity and clergy, urging charity to heal this riff. It’s said that he was miraculously saved from martyrdom when he was cast in the sea with an anchor bound to him.

Prints, plaques & holy cards available for purchase here: (website)

[greypetrel]

Just a small reminder from an Italian from Italy to anyone wishing to know more and take inspiration from my country. Do it! But, to have a less frustrating research and frustrate the local less:

"Italian" as an adjective cannot be use to describe anything before the 1861, but the geographical peninsula.

1861 marks the unification and the official birth of Italy as a state. Before, it was divided into many different states, each with a different foreign domination, each with different dialects and traditions. There is no Italy before 1861. No Italian fashion, no Italian cuisine, no Italian whatsoever.

One of the mottos of the unification was, after the country was united: "We made Italy, now we have to make Italians".

This to say: Italy is a variegated country still today, pizza isn't the national dish, isn't typical of the whole country. All the various areas sprung from different states that were occupied by different foreign powers, bringing divisions further.

If you want to research on Italy, particularly during history, the golden rule is "research regional". The more regional you go, the more accurate you will be... And the more easier your research will be (from experience).

Also: the accents are significant! "Papà" means "Dad" in Italian, but if you write it "Papa"... It's "Pope". Univocally.

And: please don't write mafia or any criminal organisation without specific research. If you don't know who Falcone and Borsellino are, stop and go back before starting your Mafia AU. Particularly if your goal is to show the criminal organisation as noble and honourable against a corrupted state... Our state is corrupted because its ties with mafia. Not the other way around. If you're looking for that kind of story, you're looking for Robin Hood, not Toto Riina.

A last thing for everyone who saw White Lotus: any hotel concierge telling a client that she looks like Peppa Pig in the face would be fired in five minutes. :)

[eretzyisrael]

by Felix Pope

The director of Algeria’s Olympic committee has claimed that a female boxer at the centre of a row over her eligibility to fight against women is the victim of a “Zionist” conspiracy.

Imane Khelif was accused of being a man and a “bullying cheat” after her Italian opponent withdrew from their bout last week after just 46 seconds.

Angela Carini claimed she had quit to “save my life” when the Algerian boxer hit her so hard she could not breathe.

Khelif was previously disqualified from the 2023 Women's World Boxing Championships which was organised by the Russian-led International Boxing Association (IBA) after she failed unspecified gender eligibility tests.

The restrictions include a ban on women with XY chromosomes from competing against other females. 

Khelif’s results from the IBA testing remain confidential, but the body has said she had a competitive advantage.

It has never been proven that Khelif has XY chromosomes, which are typically posessed by men, but can be present in women with a Differences of Sexual Development disorder. 

Despite claims that she is a man, Khelif has never identified as transgender or intersex.

After defeating Hungarian Luca Anna Hamori in the women’s 66kg division quarter-final, she insisted that she was a woman.

Speaking before the bout, which guaranteed that she would win at least a bronze medal, Yassine Arab, the director of the Algerian Olympic and Sports Committees, told the Syndney Morning Herald Khelif had been attacked by shadowy forces.

“The Zionist lobby, they want to break the mind of Imane. But now Imane is very strong. They don’t want that a Muslim girl or Arabic girl goes higher in the level of the rank of female boxing,” he said.

“We are all here for Imane. You can see all the support of everybody from the world. All the international press associations, they support Imane.”

Speaking to BeIN Sports, Khelif said: “This is a matter of dignity and honour for every woman or female.

"The entire Arab people have known me for years. For years I have been boxing in international federation competitions, they [the IBA] were unfair with me. But I have god.

“I want to tell the entire world that I am a female, and I will remain a female.

“I dedicate this medal to the world, and to all the Arabs and I tell you, long live Algeria."

[givemearmstopraywith]

i kknow this may not be your area of knowledge but do you know why the pope is suddenly saying this stuff re: marxism? hes always been progressive and genuine in his beliefs (same gender stuff, the lunch w the drag queens, etc.) but to outright say "we should befriend communists" is surprising to me. power play? old age? hes also a communist? idk

i was raised catholic and spend most of my time at a jesuit college! it's a complicated issue, but i'll do my best. edit: i also want to say that i am both pro-francis and generally very unhappy with the church in general, so i've tried to be as objective as i can.

pope francis is, first, argentinian, and second, a jesuit. as a south american he knows liberation theology, a marxist-based theology of the poor which developed in south america during the 1980s. because of its association with marxism liberation theology was treated with huge suspicion by the catholic church. cardinal ratzinger, later benedict xvi, wrote a fairly nasty castigation of liberation theology in the 80s- if i find it i'll link it.

this is the context, i believe, of his comments on marxism: it's not only a home ideology for francis, it's more necessary than ever in our current social climate. francis has always been what most catholics would consider a liberally minded pope, he exhibits that fabulous tenet of catholic social teaching called "the preferential option for the poor," and everything he has done during his papacy gestures to this, including his encyclical on climate change, laudato si, and his recent moves towards affirmation of gay and trans people being baptized. even his tour of canada to make formal apologies for residential schools came about for similar reasons: it wasn't perfect, but the reason there hadn't been a formal catholic apology prior to francis was because doctrine around papal infallibility dictates that a sitting pope cannot refute or roll back the statements of a previous pope: an apology for the doctrine of discovery and residential schools would have constituted admitting that a previous pope had been wrong, which is tantamount to admitting that god himself is wrong, since the pope is the representative of god and a direct descendent of the apostle peter. doing as much throws the entire church into a very negative light, but francis apologized anyway- which, again, while deeply imperfect is a huge deal within the church, certainly infuriated a lot of conservatives, even if it seems essentially inadequate to non-catholics.

francis isn't a communist, i don't think, but he is good. he's very apart from what constitutes the majority of the catholic magisterium (ordained members of the church- priests, bishops, cardinals, etc)- a kind of internal division developed after vatican ii, where on one hand you had conservatives who preferred traditionalism, the type of leaders who wanted to keep things QT with the reagan administration who was funding mass murder in nicaraugua- that is, at it's core, the primary reason why liberation theology was rejected when it first emerged, why it has been slow to gain traction in the church. ratzinger was a staunch conservative, and john paul ii was less so; leadership in the church goes through cycles where traditionalists are usually followed by more liberal-minded popes, who appreciate vatican ii for the groundbreaking and monumental achievement that it was rather than acting as if it signified a breakdown of religion.

the other thing is francis being a jesuit: i have a lot of jesuit friends, have gotten most of my theological education from jesuits, and applied to a jesuit college for my phd. jesuits are incredibly socially minded, dedicated consistently to social awareness and justice, and less inclined towards enclosure and privation from the world at large than other orders. they are also dedicated to poverty, like franciscans. the jesuit order is not perfect (they still will not allow a women's jesuit order, and they have a dismal track record of colonialism) but francis is the first jesuit pope and this is a huge deal in terms of the type of theology that his leadership embodies as a result. jesuists are not as a monolith liberal-minded and forward thinking, but they are generally more ready to adapt and evolve catholicism to meet contemporary needs rather than maintainig strict adherence to traditional views at the expense of the body of christ- that is to say, the body of all believers, or all whom god loves, which is everyone. incidentally, leonardo boff, one of the fathers of liberation theology, was also jesuit.

this is a pretty and dirty answer to your question but i hope it makes sense- essentially francis is recognizing that the needs of god's people override that of the church, because god's people are the church equally or more than the magisterium is the church, but it is the magisterium who has been preferred historically. but he has surprisingly little room in which to make moves towards this because of canon law and other doctrines. he's doing his best, though, more than i ever thought i'd see: i appreciate and love him deeply.