IS THE POPE A CON-MAN?

Why its a mistake to give the Catholic Church support via membership or donations

IS THE POPE A CON-MAN?

Written during the reign of John Paul II

DO NOT LET THIS EVIL MAN TRICK YOUR FRIENDS. THE PEOPLE HE HAS FOOLED ARE THE REASON HE HAS POWER. SEND A COPY OF THIS MATERIAL TO THEM.

The pope claims that Jesus founded one true Church and put one man in office to lead the Church. The first leader was the apostle Peter and the pope is his successor and the rock the Church is built on. The pope cannot err when he teaches infallibly and obedience in matters of faith, morals and Church administration is due to him. He is the Vicar of Christ, the earthly head of the Church who takes Christ’s place.

Eastern Orthodoxy preserves the original Catholic doctrine that all bishops are the successors of Peter. Jesus never actually said there would necessarily have to be only one rock at a time. Peter was the first Church leader so he was the rock but it did not mean the rock couldn't expand. Peter was the rock alone until new rocks or leaders came along such as Paul. Paul actually sounds more like the rock the Church was built on than Peter. The pope knows of the Orthodox interpretation and ignores it.

The New Testament never says that God meant for Peter to have a successor and it warns that as soon as the apostles go false Christian teachers will come along. If the early Church accepted a pope as soon as Peter was dead that does not make the Church right. Roman Catholics say that the Church would not have been allowed by God to fall into such an error. Why not? It was only a minor error after all for the pope did not become something big and infallible until centuries later and free will when abused is supposed to block what God wants for us. Peter could have been the rock the Church was built on for he was the first proper Christian and Jesus needed a convert to help him convert the rest. Perhaps all true Christians are the rock and Peter was just the first person to become this rock. This fits in better with Jesus’ insistence on equality and egalitarianism for he said there must be no Lords but only servants in his following.

Theologian popes - John Paul II and Benedict XVI were theologians - are the biggest cons of the lot. Like top Mormons and top Jehovah's Witnesses, it is easily suspected or seen that they know fine well their religion is false.

Benedict XVI only started talking about zero tolerance for child abusing clerics after the scandals broke. He virtually ran the Church under John Paul II and he never asked him to do much about it. John Paul II's record on handling clerical sex abuse was appalling and callous. Benedict XVI winces and grimaces when he hears about clerical abuse. He is as fake as his dentures.

Many believe that by every test, simple and hard, the pope is a fraud and fully aware of it.
Catholics must read these questions and decide for themselves.

1. Is the pope sincere when he says that he does what he does for God? It is because he judges that God did miracles and spoke in Christ and because he feels its true. It is really his judgement, what he wants to see, and NOT GOD he is serving. It is extreme pride and arrogance of him for he knows, as we all do, that when I say I know you I mean I have opinions of you that are my work and may not even be right? To love God is impossible. What is loved is what one decides to believe about him and feel. It’s all selfish.

2. Is the pope sincere when his law excommunicates people who deny the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary and not those who say homosexuality or killing people of different religions is right? Is doctrine more important than morality? Immoral religions like to control people’s thinking more than their actions. After all, would it be helpful for the Church to have saints running dioceses who would do the decent thing and unleash the archives relating to clerical sex abuse to the media?

3. Is the pope sincere when the so-called first pope was told by the Son of God that he was the rock the Church would be built on which need not mean he had to be leader or head of the Church and yet this rock stuff is the only excuse the papacy can rely on, being the word of Christ? Rock can mean main support and adviser not leader or pope.

4. If the pope is sincere then why does he not admit that if Jesus made Peter the rock he would build the church on that he might not have meant Peter to have a successor but that on Peter’s death it could have been that the office of the rock was given to the bishops as a whole?

5. Is the pope sincere when he won’t bring the world’s experts together to ascertain the truth about whether or not he really is or should be the head of the Church by divine authority coming from Jesus Christ a claim that all honest and competent experts doubt?

6. Is the pope sincere and honest when he won’t admit he would step down and pay back all the money taken from the people if a historical theological investigation showed that the papacy was founded on an error and was never meant to lead the Church?

7. Is it kind of the pope to promote his authority for which there is no evidence and his own role as Peter’s successor when that something is an extra excuse for people to fight about and whole countries used to be laid waste over this idea due to religious conflict?

8. Is it kind of the pope to claim that the bishop of Rome which he is, is the head of the Church for the first head was Peter the first bishop of Rome when there is no evidence that Peter was bishop of Rome but just hearsay and Clement of Rome, an alleged pope, who may have started the legend about Peter dying in Rome through lack of clarity in his writing does not actually say that he died there and certainly never indicates that he was any kind of bishop?

9. Is it sincere of the pope to claim to head the Church of the apostles when there is no evidence that the twelve apostles accepted Paul as a true apostle and his Church accepts Paul and that they may just have tolerated him as an eccentric who was better than nothing and wouldn’t anybody who was serious about following the apostles check Paul out?

10. Is the pope sincere when he says that God and Jesus come first and that we must love the Lord with all our hearts though he cannot provide great proof that he really was appointed head of the Church by God and shouldn’t that be as verifiable as the resurrection?

11. Is the pope sincere when he condemns and forbids heretical books by Catholics and says nothing about orthodox books that twist scriptures and facts and twists and takes them out of context to bolster up the credibility of the Roman Catholic Church?

12. Is the pope sincere when he allows people to use the truth in a deceiving way to avert a great evil though if his God allows lies and has such mysterious ways then how can we be sure that God is being straight with us and trust either Catholicism or God?

13. Is the pope sincere when he says that doubt is a sin against faith (question 177, A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, CTS, London) and that we should only read orthodox Catholic material so that we don’t doubt which forbids us to see if it is wrong for we all know that faiths that have something to hide are unsure of themselves and afraid of the truth?

14. Is the pope sincere when he says that the highest goodness is doing good with no reward except the thought that it is the will of God and then says God rewards in Heaven which would mean you are getting rewards that are not rewards at all but insults for they mean nothing to you but doing what God wants and receiving nothing does?

15. Is the pope sincere when he says unbaptised babies are deprived of the sight and presence of God but are made happy naturally even though when God being goodness itself and the supreme good would mean that not being with him is the worst punishment possible? What kind of man would look at a baby and think it is unfit for Heaven for its not baptised? Even a child molester could have a better attitude towards a child than that! Baptism makes us children of God according to the pope. That is in effect saying that we are God’s bastards until we are baptised. Recognise hatred when you see it.

16. Is the pope sincere when he considers it right to make babies members of his Church bound to obey him which isn’t right for there are many different religions so the child should have the religion that suits her or him best rather than being conditioned in his or her impressionable state?

17. Is it sincere of the pope to want infants in his church when he is the spiritual teacher of a faith that commands that we pretend that others are better than us (Philippians 2:3), that we see ourselves the way God sees us which is totally negative (Romans 3; Mark 10:18) and then to say that he really cares about what is best for people?

18. If the pope is sincere why does he say that God is perfect and then that God is influenced by the saints praying for us for a perfect God always does what is best whether asked to or not and cannot be influenced? – if the saints influence God then they are gods not saints and often better natured and wiser than him!

19. Is the pope sincere when he says asking God for a favour is not asking for something but that we become worthy of the favour even if he won’t grant it for prayer does not change God which still amounts to making God do something? If prayer does nothing to change God then what do we pray to saints to influence him for?

20. If the pope is sincere then why does he say that grace, a word meaning free gift, is the love of God which he freely gives us, is not our right but is a gift? He says that we need grace to make us live holy lives for it empowers us when the truth is you do deserve to be helped to live a better life and this is not grace. Grace is about trying to run people down.

21. Is the pope sincere when his god limits most grace to the seven sacraments meaning he can’t love those who don’t have the sacraments or are delayed from attending them very much?

22. Is it sincere of the pope to condemn Calvinist Christianity as inhuman for saying that God works to keep some people from being saved when his God does nothing to make the damned in Hell able to convert? If you can condone Hell you can condone anything for it is the worst possible thing. You wouldn’t think of condoning anything like child molestation so why this? Is sexually molesting a child worse than sending the child to Hell for sin forever? It must be the sexual element that is so horrific then. Hell says more about the believer than about God. And more so when we know from our own experience, our psychologists and psychiatrists that no matter how evil a person is that evil is only a small part of them - their deeds are a mixture and nobody could reject God entirely to rot in Hell. The pope knows this and still he warns about Hell betraying his delight in believing people can go there!

23. Is it sincere of the pope to condemn Calvinist Christianity as inhuman for saying God would be right if he never tried to save anybody for nobody deserves it when his own idea that grace which saves is a free gift that God is under no obligation to give us says the same thing?

24. If the pope is sincere then how can he say that God made Mary stay free from sin by keeping her from original sin and that sin is not God’s fault though he lets us be born in original sin?

25. Is the pope really compassionate when he says it would not be good if God protected us all from suffering when he argues that dead baptised babies go to Heaven without suffering and adds to the insult by saying that unbaptised babies who suffer and die are penalised and barred from Heaven because they are not baptised?

26. Is it not true that the pope by teaching things that show God has no purpose for evil is admitting that he does not believe in compassion but in fake compassion so we should take him at his word?

27. Is the pope sincere when he advocates care of the sick when he says that free will justifies God allowing evil and suffering though consciousness is more important than free will for it is the one essential for life and happiness meaning that nothing ever justifies tormenting consciousness with free will?

28. If the pope is sincere why does he make it a duty to believe that Mary had no children besides Jesus when even his own Church admits it cannot prove that this doctrine is true from the Bible which gives the opposite impression?

29. If the pope really cares for your good then why does he justify Jesus refusing to run away from the cross but walking right into it in the name of obedience to God which encourages those who say God commands some seemingly bad things and disaster follows?

30. If the pope is sincere then why does he want us to believe in Catholicism with all those doctrines that seem like absurdities and contradictions which he says are really mysteries when we could have a more understandable creed and what has too many mysteries lacks convincing power?

31. If the pope is sincere then how could he who is so intelligent and who reads and studies theology and philosophy and consults with theologians and philosophers believe in his Roman Catholic religion? How can he call his religion Catholic when it is so complicated and hard to defend and totally beyond the scope of many people who wish to know if it could be true or not?

32. If the pope is sincere then why does he say we must obey his creed of mystery or seeming contradiction even if it brings great suffering and even death on us for we are in God’s hands and when we could have a faith with less mystery and then condemn fanatics who say it is a mystery why God wants us to kill unbelievers?

33. Is the pope sincere when he says it is okay to ask questions and can’t tell us why God lets us suffer and makes and sends deadly viruses which is the most important question of all and how can it be good to ask questions unless you are going to get answers?

34. Is the pope honest when he says that religion cannot justify 9/11 when he knows his own Bible and Jesus say that God commanded that homosexuals and adulterers and idolaters must be slain by stoning to death without pity and Jesus risked his own disciples lives?

35. Is the pope sincere when he says that capital punishment may never be the will of God nowadays even though he knows that his God commanded it a lot even for small crimes in the Bible?

36. If the pope is sincere then why does he promote Catholicism which must thrive on wishful thinking for it is not a credible faith for then he knows it must be about feeling not faith?

37. Is the pope sincere when he says venial sin does not cut you off God and make you his enemy but mortal sin does for it is offensive to God who hates sin infinitely so it is very serious when God must hate venial sin as much meaning it is really mortal sin?

38. Is the pope sincere when he tells you that you can do good works that please God while you have some sin in you when that is telling God, “God I have these sins but I won’t repent of them for I want to do good when it suits me,” meaning your good works insult him?

39. If the pope is insincere in his faith does that not mean that when he teaches that certain sins take you to hell forever that he is vindictively wishing that will happen to those who die unrepentant? He wishes it as well if he is sincere for he doesn't have proof and that is bad. You need absolute proof before you can accuse people of being able to sin so much. The level of his vindictiveness depends on the amount of evidence he has. The less evidence and the more doubts then the more vindictiveness. Also, to have the right to be able to teach such incredible and fantastical doctrines you need to know all the pros and cons which nobody can do. How can he claim that even if his religion is man-made that it is a good thing to think it is not but was made by God when he has doctrines like the irrevocable sentence to the torment of Hell forever to mention just one?

40. If the pope means it that human life is the most important thing to look after then what right has he to put faith before people by approving of a faith that says people should be eternally damned for relatively harmless sins like fornication?

41. Is the pope sincere when he won’t excommunicate Catholic dictators though they murder many Catholics and isn’t a Church that won’t do that associating itself with their crimes?

42. Is the pope sincere when his laws force young children to tell their private sins to priests and is this not inappropriate and a form of child-abuse for children are fragile? Every second you commit a sin say of gossip is a fresh sin so the sins have to be told in detail which is so degrading.

43. Is the pope sincere when he says the confessional can forgive sins even though you have some small sins you are not sorry for when Christ said that you need to forgive others and by implication yourself before you can expect pardon of God?

44. Is the pope sincere when he tells you to forgive your enemy (which is really loving your enemy more than yourself because it is acting as if the evil he did is forgotten and exposing yourself to more danger) and when not forgiving can be harmless as long as you avoid being eaten up by your bad feelings?

45. Is the pope sincere when he says that when Jesus said if you forgive the sins of any they are forgiven and if you don’t they are retained that he commanded confession for the priest needs to hear all before he can decide whether to forgive or not and then accepts the absolution of people who haven’t confessed as valid?

46. Is the pope sincere when he welcomes venial sinners to communion even though what they are saying is, “God I will eat your body and drink your blood but I will not give up these sins” which means there is nothing praiseworthy in their act?

47. Is the pope sincere when he acts lovingly towards children while advocating a doctrine that claims that you need to be baptised to be accepted by God no matter how good you are or even if you are a baby?

48. Is the pope sincere when he says we must love sinners and hate their sins even though to say that your sin is evil and hateful is to say that about you? The sin is not evil for it is not a thing or entity. You are what is evil. You created the act of your own free will for you sin because you are a sinner. Therefore sin is in your nature and is a part of you . It is you. It is obvious that you cannot sincerely condemn the sin without also condemning the person that committed it and our feelings about sin are not feelings for sin strictly speaking but feelings about the person doing the sin. Your sin reveals you so to condemn it, is to condemn you. Condemning sin is personal. It feels personal. It looks even worse when you read how the Church says it teaches that homosexuality is a disorder but homosexuals are not disordered. So if you have the flu you can equally be said not to have the flu. The hypocritical claim that you can love the sinner not the sin is foundational to the Catholic system so the whole system is based on a lie. Would you believe a person who said to you, "I have nothing against you. It is just your sin I have something against"? Love the sinner and hate the sin means love the sinner in spite of the sin which you hate so it is grudging love - if it can be called love at all. It can hardly mean you must love the sinner because of the sin you hate for that is impossible - you can't both hate the sin and love it. Religious love is fake love.

49. Is the pope sincere when he pretends to hate sins and not sinners to avoid the legal consequences of openly advocating hatred? He advocates the kind of hatred that is bottled up and leads to mental disorders.

50. Is the pope sincere when he says that marriage is a union of love when the truth is if you could wave a magic wand and get the most exciting and attractive partner in the world without hurting anyone you definitely would so the love for your partner is just superficial and taking second, third or fourth or whatever best for it is better than nothing?

51. Is the pope sincere when he says marriage is for life and yet allows separation which means the marriage exists only in law but not in reality?

52. Is the pope sincere that he cares for women when he asks them to vow to become the lawful partner of their husbands for better or for worse meaning they are willing to throw away their lives even if their husband should prove to be wife-beaters for they have the most to suffer, because of society and they are true rock for the children, if a marriage turns sour?

53. Is the pope sincere when he says how bad divorce is and yet if a Catholic marries a non-baptised person such as a Jew or a Muslim he will grant them a divorce – this is called the Pauline Privilege?

54. Is the pope sincere when he doesn’t enforce the Bible teaching given by God – Jesus said that the Genesis account of Adam and Eve was true which means he agreed that God ordered that Adam be Eve’s master - that husbands are the heads of their wives or make sure the wedding ceremony stresses that so that all are sure of what marriage is about, the subjection of female to male in the name of love?

55. Is the pope sincere when he allows communion in the hand though if the whole wafer is the body of Christ bits of it that you can hardly see will be stuck to the hand and lost?

56. Is the pope sincere when he teaches salvation by faith and good works and sacraments when the Bible he says is authored by God teaches that salvation is by faith alone and not as a result of works (Ephesians 2:8-10) – the Bible says works and not earnings so he knows it is doing more than supporting the Catholic notion that you can’t earn salvation here but it is supporting Protestantism?

57. Is the pope sincere when he says we must tell people the unpalatable truth about themselves in a gentle way even though that is still insulting them and the only reason they are not offended is because of the way they are conditioned?

58. Is the pope sincere when he says that his Church is the one true Church for it is united in one faith when most of his own theologians and flock are against him and disagree with one another and are one Church only in name and any time they do agree they disagree on why they believe meaning their faith is not the same at all for it is faith in their reasons?

59. Is the pope sincere when he says that miracles show the Roman Catholic Church is the only true Church when his Church will not even investigate miracles on the scientific level that contradict Catholic dogma so he is being selective and dishonest with the evidence?

60. Is it sincere of the pope to say you have an obligation to believe what is in the Bible and tradition and their miracles but not to believe in miracles that have happened since the apostles died for is not that double standards and many of the latest miracles are better verified than anything in the Bible?

61. Is the pope sincere when he accepts the miracles of the Middle Ages as true though by today’s standards many of them they would have been scientifically debunked?

62. Is the pope sincere when he says the resurrection of Jesus took place even though the gospels do nothing to prove that the burial of Jesus was not a magic trick thus explaining the empty tomb and that the Devil did the other miracles like the visions of Jesus and would the fact that there are problems with believing the resurrection not suggest that the Devil was involved?

63. Is the pope sincere when we would have to tell ourselves that the body of Jesus couldn’t have been stolen and the visions of the risen Jesus must have been real to believe in the resurrection which means that we consider the resurrection to be the most reasonable explanation of the data whereas in fact the rule is that a natural explanation must be accepted unless there is absolute proof that the miracle happened which is unobtainable? The whole of Christianity is based on hatred of reason and therefore of the only thing that is best for people.

64. Is the pope sincere when he says that creation is a miracle of God and then that we should look for rational explanations and find none before we should accept a miracle story? Something cannot come from nothing - no rational explanation is possible if it can or has. So creation implies that rational explanations are worthless. Also God cannot create even if things have come out of nothing. He didn't use material to make stuff for there was no material. Something coming out of nothing would be so impossible to explain rationally that it makes no sense to say that God was behind it - even if he exists. God didn't use any power to make. So to say he makes all out of nothing is absurd. If our existence is a miracle then what is so great about rational explanations? The pope is scheming to get some control over what miracles we take as evidence for what religion is true. He wants us to think that there are miracle that show that the Catholic faith is correct. He wants us to think that miracles occur to verify the Catholic faith and that the miracles reported by faiths that condemn him as a fraud are false.

65. Is the pope sincere when he knows that Zen Buddhism which has no doctrine but just a technique for achieving an ecstasy that is experientially everlasting though you paradoxically come out of it again and gives meaning to life is wiser than Catholicism which makes people look forward to death to have an eternal bliss that might not even exist?

66. If the pope is sincere and somebody says an angel revealed four gospels that seem convincing that somebody else is the messiah and not Jesus would the pope forsake Jesus even if these gospels seem more convincing than his four gospels?

67. Is the pope sincere when he says that using artificial contraception is wrong for fertility is not an illness but a blessing when he lets you change your blonde hair to black though blonde hair should be a natural blessing from God and lets you wear glasses though your eyesight though faulty is not a problem?

68. Is the pope sincere when he says that sex must always be open to new life in case God wants to send a baby and allows barren couples to have sex?

69. Is the pope sincere when he allows “natural” birth regulation which can only spoil sex for the partners are afraid of having another baby and when if it is up to God to send a baby as both Jesus and the pope teach then why not trust in God and not worry about natural family planning at all? Natural family planning indicates mistrust in God and if birth control is bad so is it.

70. Is it kind of the pope to say that condoms should be banned even when it is mostly those who use them for occasional sex which will do no harm that seek them and is it not murderous of him to want two people who will have sex to do it without condoms and spread AIDS? What does he mean when he says he has compassion for those who feel they need contraception or divorce? He can't mean it. He can't think, "Oh dear I wish I could allow contraception or divorce", for if these things are evil and sinful that is not loving of him to think that. He believes that temptations come from a flawed character. Past sins lead to temptations. Thus he would be unable to feel sorry for them because he would hold that if they had tried to be holier they would welcome these challenges so that there would be nothing for anybody to think about feeling sorry for them about.

71. Is the pope sincere when he says that two ethical homosexuals who love each other are disordered and should be urged to end the relationship though he says his clergy who refuse to love in the name of celibacy are not disordered?

72. Is the pope sincere when he does not emphasise that doubters should be encouraged to leave the Church if they can't find solutions? Accepting that people make errors is a part of life. When people make so many errors they should be encouraged to leave the Catholic Church if they think it is wrong even if they are wrong.

73. Is the pope sincere when he apologised to the Jews and never gave them back what his Church took from them in money and land?

74. Is it kind of the pope to say that the Eucharist is God’s most beneficial gift and then to deprive most of the poor of it by not allowing married men and women to be ordained meaning that it is better to do this than to ordain married men and women which signifies real hatred for them?

75. Is the pope sincere when he would fire a bishop for ordaining priests without his consent and keep on a bishop that was proven to have covered up for paedophile priests and does this not make the pope a supporter of paedophiles?

76. Is it good of the pope to say the Catholics in China who undergo death and persecution for refusing to stop acknowledging the pope when they could save themselves by joining the breakaway Catholic Church of China do right?

77. Is not the pope’s teaching that God comes first for he is the sustainer and creator of all life so we should not be afraid to give up our lives for him an encouragement to those who want to commit religious murders?

78. Is the pope sincere when he says we must love God alone and then that we must love others for his sake which really means we are not valuing them but God and tricking them that we value them? The pope evilly approves of Jesus who said that the main and first commandment and greatest is to love God with all your being and loving yourself and your neighbour is only in second place. Though the two go together according to Christian illogic, it is clear that if there is a choice to be made you should not love your neighbour and yourself but God.

79. Is not the pope asking us to love God and obey him really asking us to love and obey the pope’s perception of God for nobody can know God directly and those that say they do don’t agree on very much?

80. Is the pope sincere when he makes Catholics of young people who do not have the resources to make an intelligent and sensible decision that they want to be part of the Catholic Church and since when did children not wanting confirmation in the faith get a choice?

81. Is it sincere of the pope to command his Church to charge for masses for the dead when there are other ways to make money and this amounts to selling the sacraments?

82. If the pope is sincere then why does he say that God allows evil to bring good out of it when the fact is we must put this thought that evil has uses out of our mind? Most people claim that they do evil to bring about good. The rule of harm none seeks to prevent that but the pope has evils such as forcing a woman to stay married to her evil husband that he calls good!

83. Is the pope sincere when he says that God lets us kill each other if we wish for he respects free will which really means that free will is more important than human life which is a totally ridiculous and callous thing to say and shows how belief in deity is intrinsically violent? To even try and justify God after that speaks of the presence of human evil.

84. Is it not true that if the pope really believes human life is the supreme value he would sell the Vatican treasures and give them away to the poor and it is better for the pontifical mass to be held in a huge tent than in an expensive basilica?

85. Is it wise to believe the pope when he says he does the evils we accuse him of preserve the gospel and stand by it and not to inflate his own ego when nothing can be more important than human life?

86. Is the pope sincere when he forbids abortion even to save the mother’s life though he would let you kill an innocent lunatic to save your own life and has loads of ridiculous miracles and apparitions to back him up for no truly good God would agree with him?

87. Is the pope sincere when he honours women and prays to Mary though he hates the female sex so much that he would rather they would all die rather than have life-saving abortions?

88. Is the pope sincere when he allows the removal of a diseased womb to save the mother’s life though it will kill her unborn baby for it is not intended to kill the baby but to remove her womb and make her better (so its not abortion) for if abortion is never right that means the child comes before the mother so the womb should be let alone?

89. Is the pope sincere when he claims that both mother and foetus have an equal right to life for if a foetus with no intelligence or consciousness like an adult with a developed brain would have is equal to an adult then surely its life is more important for the adult has lived properly and it hasn’t?

90. Is the pope sincere when he allows the slaughter and eating of the higher animals such as sheep for a really moral person would only allow the eating of animals that don’t know they are alive?

91. Is the pope sincere when he regards the Bible as the word of God despite its God urging cruelty to animals in the Temple cult?

92. Is the pope sincere when people are in car crashes and fear they are dying have to endure the horror of dying without the last sacraments because of his Church’s teaching and is it not evil for religion to hurt people over doctrines?

93. What right has the pope to order priests to go and anoint the dying which often scares them out of their wits and upsets any young children they may have? Imagine a Catholic in a car crash who doesn’t have the priest to forgive their sins by anointing before they die! The Church says you need the priest for assurance of pardon and even then there is no guarantee but its worse without the priest.

94. Is the pope sincere when his God teaches that serious sinners roast in Hell forever in torment which is an idea very harmful and frightening to children and even to not mention the doctrine but get them to accept Christ who taught it as infallible is just as bad and very manipulative?

95. If the pope really cares about people then why does he say it is better to die in a car crash than to commit a mortal sin like pre-marital sex which is putting religion before people and endorsing fanatical faith which is the first step towards religious terrorism?

96. Is the pope sincere when he says that who commit adultery, contraception, homosexuality, masturbation are committing mortal sin and so will burn in Hell forever because there are countless versions of the gospel of Christ that are more humane and he rejects them for he prefers his version which really means he condemns them because he wants to?

97. Is the pope sincere when he claims to be infallible under some conditions and says that infallibility is not divine inspiration but just protection from error when he researches a religious topic when it is evident that some inspiration would be necessary for him to get the right answer? If the pope is inspired then that is contrary to the Roman Catholic doctrine that the faith was given entirely to the apostles and that the Church only identifies and clarifies what belongs to their teaching and that there is no new revelation and the Church has no authority to make new doctrines.

98. Is the pope sincere when he says his tradition is infallible and the Catholic Church cannot err much for the Holy Spirit gives it special guidance and when his Church doesn’t condemn smoking as sinful?

99. Is the pope serious when he dares to say that Jesus has made him and his Church infallible and not the state which has the power to wage war and execute criminals as if dogma is more important than human life and few Catholics care if the Church really is infallible and dispute it and even believers can come up with ways to deny that infallible declarations fulfilled the conditions for being infallible?

100. Is the pope sincere when he does such terrible things - he orders simple people who will obey to reject condoms and to beg their rapists not to use them even if it means they will get AIDS - and expects us to like him and is it right to like him and be repulsed by other evil people? Is his compassion any different from the compassion a paedophile may show for the child he has left bleeding? It is repulsive. Jesus let rip at the Pharisees and scribes for laying a heavy burden on people and doing little to help them with it - the pope then as long as he doesn't sell the Vatican to help pay for the AIDS treatment of the people who obey him is under the same condemnation. It is reasonable for this to be done. Just because something is big and dramatic and difficult doesn't make it unreasonable. Jesus asked a rich young man to give away all he had to the poor (Matthew 19). At that time, Jesus hadn't founded the Church yet or risen from the dead to show he was the Prophet predicted by Moses. His asking the young man to part with all his wealth indicates his belief that it was just good sense for somebody who called themselves good to do that. Jesus was not asking him to trust him and therefore to give it away. He was asking him not as God or as Prophet or Messiah but as a teacher of sound spiritual insight. This is very important. It refutes the allegation of the Church that Jesus was calling him to a vocation of poverty - a vocation to which not all are called. The young man said he observed all the commandments that Jesus quoted. But Jesus had only quoted a few so one cannot assume the young man wasn't falling in other things. Besides Jesus never said he agreed that the young man had kept them all. Quite the contrary. The young man said he kept the commandment to love neighbour as oneself which is impossible for anybody to keep (Matthew 19:18-20). Not surprisingly, Jesus told him that there was only one more thing he lacked and that was his failure to give all he had to the poor. The young man forgot about God's commandment to look after the poor. This clearly indicates that wealth or property is sinful for Christians. Jesus then said that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to be saved but then he added that nothing is impossible with God. He clearly meant that it is impossible to be saved as long as you are rich but God can work on you to make you abandon your wealth for him. The apostles were astonished that he said the rich man cannot be saved and said that if that is the case nobody can be saved. This indicates that they knew that he meant anybody with any property by rich man including them. The same story can be read in Mark 10 and Luke 18. There is no hint in the texts that the requirement for poverty was an extra and not a commandment necessary for salvation. The context is about commandments that need to be obeyed to be saved. Acts over and above one's duty are not mentioned. Jesus condemns Vatican wealth. Period.

101. Is the pope sincere when he claims that there is far too much merit to atone for sin and he can use the surplus to cancel the punishment of the souls in Purgatory through giving out indulgences. This contradicts the doctrine that serious sin is endlessly bad for if it is endlessly bad it needs an endless atonement. It insults the Bible doctrine that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin which is in the First Epistle of John. The Church contradicts John the apostle so it can hardly deserve to be called the apostolic Church.

102. Is the pope sincere when he has people paying for Masses to atone for the souls in Purgatory to help pay their debt to God so that they may be released sooner when through his power of indulgences he could release them all at a stroke? This is simply the Church using the dead to make money. It is prostituting the dead. It is the sin of Simony for which Peter invoked great evil on Simon Magus for committing. The Church will say the dead deserve to be in Purgatory so no wrong is being done. But they deserve far more to be in the healing presence of God. The pope evilly and unnecessarily keeps them out. Antichrist. It amounts to child abuse considering that some of the souls will be children who died horribly on earth. The pope and the priests think they did not suffer enough.

103. Is the pope sincere when he says that God being all-good does not make evil for evil is not a real thing but distorted good? The pope uses that to help excuse God letting people suffer. It is hard-hearted to tell a sick person that the useless bacteria eating them alive is good in the wrong place when the bacteria is good for nothing. Yet it is blasphemy to say the bacteria is bad for implies God makes bad things. Perhaps God makes them so that we can use his other creations to make bleach and destroy them? Times we can do nothing so that idea doesn't help much!

104. Is the pope sincere when he knows from history that if the bishop of Rome was made the head of the Church then he would be head of administration of the Church which administration is only a recent development? He would choose all the bishops. But no bishop of Rome chose bishops - the people did - and that went on for centuries. None of the bishops of Rome in the first millennium then were popes. How dare the secular media take seriously the claim that the present pope is whatever number since Peter! That is historical revisionism and a lie. But does the Church care??????????

104. If the pope is insincere what does that say about the clergy of his Church for any one of them could become pope?

Last: The pope is a thief as well as a liar and who gets more respect from the world than he should and certainly should not be given a penny. The good he does is done to attract people to his evil, which he would call God-given virtue, and is really just a cynical bait for the unwary. We will not be impressed by it or him. The pope does not seem to know many things and this lack gives him a deeply flawed and deeply threatening moral compass that disqualifies him from getting any prestige or faith on the world stage.