Select /all/ at the end of the list. Then you will see the difference.
See
1- He declared that you do not have to believe in Christ to be saved.
The claim exaggerates his position. He hasn’t denied the necessity of Christ for salvation, but has emphasized God’s mercy and the possibility of salvation for those outside the Church. The Church still teaches that explicit faith in Christ is the normative path to salvation.
Pope Francis didn’t introduce this idea, it’s rooted in Catholic teaching. The Church has long held that those who, through no fault of their own, don’t know Christ but live according to their conscience can be saved by God’s grace, as taught in Vatican II (modern) and by theologians like Aquinas(traditional).
He’s not saying belief in Christ is irrelevant but that God’s mercy extends to those who haven’t heard the Gospel.
The idea draws from biblical passages like Romans 2:14–16, where St. Paul suggests that Gentiles who follow their conscience “show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts”.
More proof of this:
Early Church Fathers:
St. Clement of Alexandria: He suggested that God’s truth was partially revealed to pagans, allowing them to respond to divine grace implicitly.
St. Justin Martyr: He argued that those who lived according to the “Logos” before Christ, like Socrates, could be considered “Christians before Christ” and thus saved by God’s grace.
You also have this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptism_of_desire
also called baptism by desire, is a doctrine according to which a person is able to attain the grace of justification through faith, perfect contrition and the desire for baptism, without the water baptism having been received.
The Catholic Church teaches in the Catechism of the Catholic Church that "baptism is necessary for salvation". It also states the desire for baptism "brings about the fruits of Baptism without being a sacrament"
While some fringes within Catholicism hold that water is necessary for baptism, with no exceptions, the Catholic Church has traditionally and formally recognized baptism of desire
2- He declared that not accepting rapefugees into your countries is a sin.
He’s framed rejection of migrants as contrary to Christian charity, but there’s no evidence he’s declared it a sin in a canonical sense. His rhetoric focuses on moral responsibility, not legal mandates,
leaving room for prudential judgment on immigration policy.
What he called a sin, is
the indifference toward migrants, not the rejection of them. It is not specific to any policies.
He did say that rejecting migrants "violate the moral law", which implies moral failing,
but never explicitly say "sin".
In catechetical terms, a sin requires deliberate intent and grave matter. Francis hasn’t formally declared rejecting migrants a sin in this technical sense, such as in a magisterial document or ex cathedra statement.
3- He reversed policy on blessing sodomitical unions.
Completely false.
He permitted blessings for
individuals, but
not the unions themselves.
What Fiducia Supplicans actually says:
Approved by Pope Francis, the document allows priests to offer spontaneous,
non-liturgical blessings to same-sex couples and others in “irregular” unions (e.g., divorced and remarried)
as a pastoral gesture of God’s mercy.
It explicitly states that these blessings
“do not constitute an approval of the union”.
The document reaffirms that marriage is exclusively between a man and a woman, per Catholic doctrine
Francis clarified in a 2023 interview: “To bless a homosexual-type union… goes against the law of the Church. But to bless each person, why not?” (La Stampa, Dec. 18, 2023). This underscores the focus on individuals.
4- He injected himself into American politics every opportunity he got, to try and turn conservative catholics against Trump.
Not sure what this has to do with pro-troon policy. Also, his comments reflect his global advocacy, not a targeted political strategy.
There is plenty of reasons to be against Trump as a Catholic or as a conservative. For example, scamming his own boomer base with crypto, or giving refuge to rapists like the Tate Brothers.
5- He broke bread with unrepentent transsexual prostitutes.
This is missing a ton of context by itself, and I would claim saying "broke bread" is scandalous because it implies Eucharistic acts.
Pope Francis supported a priest in Rome who provided food and aid to transgender prostitutes, mostly from South America, during the COVID-19 lockdown, these people faced extreme poverty, and some turned to prostitution for survival.
Francis met with those transgender prostitutes
to offer pastoral care, consistent with his focus on mercy and as part of his pastoral outreach. I'm not seeing any issue with this. What they are doing is wrong, but it doesn't mean that they don't deserve any mercy from Christ. Bringing those people closer to Christ and to repent is the goal. I don't see the issue with this
Mercy =/= endorsement.
Pastoral care is not an endorsement of someone's lifestyles, this is also something that is done for prisoners.
As Christ did with sinners.
The Church teaches mercy for all, regardless of their struggles.
"The Church welcomes everyone, but does not approve every choice" Is what he said himself about this
Jesus prioritized ministering to sinners and outcasts (tax collectors, prostitutes) without endorsing their sins (Luke 5:30–32, John 8:1–11). Pastoral care reflects this, meeting people where they are to offer mercy and hope (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 545).
Criticizing Pope Francis for this, is the same as retroactively judging Christ for doing pastoral care too.
The Church teaches that encountering God's mercy precedes repentance, pastoral care creates a bridge for dialogue and conversion by showing unconditional love.
Every person, regardless of their circumstances, is made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27) and deserves compassion.
And the best for last:
6- He spent the last ten years using his global megaphone to declare that every moral principle held sacred by every Christian throughout history is actually wrong, and the atheists were right the whole time.
Citation needed.
To add to this:
a). Catholicism will never be some "larping crusade kill all troon religion", it is rooted in Christ's teachings of mercy and love (Catechism, 1822, before Vatican II), and it's better to criticize Catholicism itself if your issue is with that, than criticize Pope Francis for acting according to the Catholic Church and Christ's teaching.
b). Most articles done about Pope Francis are made dishonestly by jews, they will praise him, claim that he is doing more than he is actually doing (more as in, trespass pastoral care to something blashemous and heretical), and a lot of people will fall for this.
If you are Catholic, you are being manipulated to hate Pope Francis.
If you are not Catholic, you just hate Catholicism, which is fine if this is what you believe, but nothing Pope Francis is doing goes against the Church.
