This is the most salient sentence from Francis on the issue:
The promise was that when the glass was full, it would overflow, benefitting the poor. But what happens instead, is that when the glass is full, it magically gets bigger nothing ever comes out for the poor.
I find myself split about Pope Francis. I disagree with his statements about homosexuality, atheists, and now ecumenism. However, I fully agree with his statement above about the glass getting magically bigger. He's nailed it.
Rush Limbaugh is extremely rich for doing pretty much nothing but driving advertising and for spreading rather ignorant views, not always but the vast majority of the time such as by saying that Francis is a Marxist.
On this site, I have made quite clear that I am a Christian and, therefore, spiritually a communist but certainly not a Marxist. Unlike Pope Francis, I won't say that I've met good Marxists, as I can't help but think of Jesus saying that only one is good: God. I understand that Francis is speaking in relative terms though. There are Marxists who do genuinely feel for the poor and want to lift them.
As for Limbaugh, he'll regurgitate the hackneyed statements about capitalism creating more wealth and lifting more from poverty than any other system ever. Well, capitalism has always put its boot on the backs of the necks of any who want to do things cooperatively rather than competitively. That's because if cooperation were to be allowed to flourish unmolested by capitalism, it would do better than capitalism in every respect. The superrich wouldn't be superrich relative to everyone else because everyone would be living in super abundance.
The sociopathic streak in the likes of Rush Limbaugh just wouldn't be egotistically satisfied with that. It's an illness of the heart and soul.
Now, what Pope Francis can do is come to understand that the Roman Catholic Church stifled communal living among the laypeople. It only allowed the religious orders to live communally or communistically.
He should read about the Christian Commons Project and see that Christians should live on the land and work it to bring forth for Christianity which necessarily includes bringing forth for the poor. When I say Christians there, I mean those now in the pews and those who have left the pews because of the historically stifling acts of the various denominations.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)