Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

152 thoughts on “Rush Limbaugh responds to the Pope’s attack on Capitalism

  1. I am a faithful Catholic and obedient to the Magesterium of the Catholic Church. That being said, the Pope, while led by the Holy Spirit and Scripture, is NOT infallible in EVERYTHING he says. Despite his comments becoming a billboard for the Holy Catholic Church, his economic and political stances are not required of every Catholic. There have actually been very few moments of absolute Infallible Doctrine coming from the Pope (i.e. Immaculate Conception). That being said, as a faithful Catholic, I know and believe that it is Capitalism that most upholds human dignity and life while remaining charitable and selfless. Is it not best to believe that most people can do GREAT things and reach their fullest potential as realized in their own dreams and ambitions? I refuse to believe that of all the people sitting on their couches receiving government welfare checks are reaching this potential – while there are exceptions (i.e. people with disabilities). In conclusion, it is POSSIBLE to be a Capitalist and Catholic as the Pope’s economic political standing is NOT infallible.

    1. The Doctrine of Papal Infallibity, as you correctly point out does not mean that the pope is infallible in everything. The pope is a human being like the first pope, Peter, who denied Jesus three times before the “cock crowed” – clearly a fallible action by Peter.

      Pope Francis is the vicar of Saint Peter and is just as human and just as fallible EXCEPT when he speaks the truth about God and Jesus Christ and sin.

      The doctrine of papal infallibility when the pope speaks on matters of faith and morals stems from Jesus’ own words to the apostles when He told them that he would send them the Advocate – the Holy Spirit – to guide them and His church – which He built on the rock called Peter – into all truth.

      The Church has stated that as a part of church doctrine, this means that the Holy Spirit will do exactly what the Good Lord said and lead into all truth – that is what is meant, as I understand it, by the doctrine of papal infallibility.

      It doesn’t mean the pope won’t make a mistake or commit a sin. It refers to his teaching authority on matters of faith and morals as the shepherd of the church that we have to believe that he is speaking the truth through the guidance of the Holy Spirit which Jesus sent to be with the church till the end of time.

      John Craven
      New Orleans

  2. The bible, the Catholic Church….whatever…there is no mandate that you give. You give charity from the bottom of your heart, to gain graces for your soul…forced charity by your government does not count. You do not get kicked out of the church if you don’t tithe. God ask we do this in his name, for his love and as a act of love towards our fellow man.

  3. It may well be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven, but hell is full of socialists.

  4. NOTE: DIstributionism tends to dominate Catholic thinking, not Socialism nor Marxism. Although I disagree with Pope Francis on this issue, and yes I am an every Sunday Catholic, I do not think he is Marxist. Rush was being sarcastic.

    1. I didn’t detect any sarcasm in Rush. I’d also disagree re. “distributionism” – a rose by any other name is a rose.

      There’s a dangerous strain of liberalism running through the catholic church (look how many support Dear Leader and the socialist democrat party).

      Theological liberalism usually is a servant of political liberalism, and modern liberalism is hostile to objective, authoritative truth, i.e. God’s truth.

    2. DIstributionism is new concept to me but it seems to by a mix between capitalism and socialism with voluntary collectivism thrown in. How this would work in the real world is beyond me, not everyone will be willing to co-operate and if it’s forced then it becomes more like Communism. I’m a little weary of any system that tries to make things fair and just, isn’t this what the Marxist also try to do? I’m not sure how DIstributionism is compatible with Christianity either. There is only one instance in the Book of Acts were things came to close it and that was for a limited time out of necessity. I’ve heard other statements from the Pope calling for wealth distribution and condemning the rich, how is this different from Marxism?

  5. The important fact to remember is that Pope Francis agrees with Rush-that capitalism is the most just economic system. We can all agree that human nature can corrupt capitalism. We can’t think of capitalism as infallible. By the way, papal infallibility only applies to teachings on faith and morals. Pope Francis would be the first to admit that he has human flaws, like all of us.

    1. It’s not so much that human nature can corrupt capitalism, it’s that human nature is corrupt. That’s what any economic system is fallible. But what capitalism does is harness human nature in a way that benefits the rest of us.

  6. Start giving away the Vatican assets, Mr. Pope. Socialism has never worked. Start reading some non-Common Core history books. Start motivating people to work and be responsible!

  7. Wait a second. According to the teachings I learned in Catholic School as a yout, a mere skull full of mush, the pope is infallible. Therefore, El Rushbo must be wrong. (For those of you in Rio Linda, this statement contains literary devices commonly known as sarcasm.)

    1. I don’t agree with the Pope on this issue, but, you sure have a lame memory for a Doctor. Maybe you should go back to school and relearn the rarified conditions of Papal infalibilty.

      1. When I was in Catholic school in the ’50s and ’60s, they taught us that the pope was the direct descendent (for lack of a better word) of St. Peter and had such a close connection to God that it made him infallible. Their word, “infallible” I recall clearly. Maybe it is not part of the dogma now, but it was at that time. When I left CS, I was also stunned to find out the Pilgrims weren’t all Catholic.

    2. The Pope is a man and all men are fallible regardless of profession. As a Catholic, there are many Church teachings which I strongly disagree with based on my reading and studying of the Bible. BTW, I appreciate your sarcasm.

      1. Agreed. For example, as I see it today, the Hail Mary is idol worship. I’ve met many Catholics who are good Christians but it seems that the church itself has strayed in some areas.

        1. By chance, are you a Born Again Christian? I only ask because I have friends who are and they often speak of ‘idol worship’ with regards to the Catholic church. This is also true with other Christian denominations like the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I truly enjoy discussing religion and I especially enjoy understanding other Christian perspectives of their beliefs.

          The Blessed Mother or Our Lady’s importance has grown over time and will be manifested in prayer by Catholics always IMO. Especially with the more recent apparitions of Mary at Lourdes and at Fatima.

          But what’s ironic, is the word ‘Virgin’ in the Bible as applied to Jesus’ birth is based on a mistranslation. The proper translation is a ‘Young Girl’ according to a majority of biblical scholars.

          Young Mary vs Virgin Mary: A mistranslation of epic proportions
          http://translation.komalingua.com/en/component/k2/item/157-young-mary-vs-virgin-mary-a-mistranslation-of-epic-proportions.html

          However, this is still debated heatedly among scholars.

        2. “Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee.”

          That was the salutation given by the Archangel Gabriel to the Blessed Virgin Mary at the Annunciation when Gabriel told her that by the power of the Holy Spirit she would conceive a child, the son of the Most High.

          What does it mean to be “full of grace”?

          Does it not mean that it is to be without sin?

          Only the power of the Most High can make that happen.

          Later, to her cousin Elizabeth, Mary would say “my soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord” and “from now on all generations shall call me Blessed.”

          It is not nor has it ever been idol worship to venerate the Holy Mother of God, Mary, for her “yes”, her “fiat” to the Archangel Gabriel, when she said, “let it be done to me according to thy word” and in saying “yes” she became the “ark” of the Redeemer into the world.

          That is not idol worship to recognize and praise Mary for saying yes to God. As Catholics we do so by praying the Rosary which is a compendium if you will of Christ’s life on earth as recorded in the Gospels. Each mystery of the rosary is a reflection on an aspect of Christ’s life, such as the Sorrowful Mysteries which take us through Jesus’ Agony in the Garden, to the Scourging at the Pillar, to the Crowning with Thorns, to the Carrying of the Cross, to the Crucifixion, none of which would have been possible had Mary not said “Yes” when the Archangel Gabriel visited her to tell her “the Lord is with Thee.”

          Mary’s role in Jesus’ redemption of humanity through his sacrifice on the Cross where she stood in sorrow when Jesus said to her “Woman behold your Son!” – her role is without peer or precedent. That is a statement of fact which we, in the Catholic faith, acknowledge through the saying of the Rosary.

          John Craven
          New Orleans

          1. I have my interpretation, you have yours. I don’t have time for discussion this morning, but suffice it to say I don’t believe in asking Mary to pray for you, didn’t Jesus say, “No one comes to the Father but through me?”

  8. What’s with the Prog Insurance ads? Well, it is good to see they’re wasting their money here.

  9. It is easier for free citizens to police the Capitalistic economic system, than it is the Government run Socialistic system.

    Under Socialism, greed, corruption theft and evil acts by the government, are harder to expose as the Government grows all powerful. An all powerful Government will abuse its authority and hurt innocents. I don’t think God wants that!

    Pope Benedict has bigger problems like dealing with the Last Pope prophecy! When he speaks like this he feeds the prophecy!

  10. It is easier for free citizens to police the Capitalistic economic system, than it is the Government run Socialistic system.

    Under Socialism, greed, corruption theft and evil acts by the government, are harder to expose as the Government grows all powerful. An all powerful Government will abuse its authority and hurt innocents. I don’t think God wants that!

    Pope Benedict has bigger problems like dealing with the Last Pope prophecy! When he speaks like this he feeds the prophecy!

  11. It is easier for free citizens to police the Capitalistic economic system, than it is the Government run Socialistic system.

    Under Socialism, greed, corruption theft and evil acts by the government, are harder to expose as the Government grows all powerful. An all powerful Government will abuse its authority and hurt innocents. I don’t think God wants that!

    Pope Benedict has bigger problems like dealing with the Last Pope prophecy! When he speaks like this he feeds the prophecy!

  12. I don’t think the Pope’s comments should come as any surprise. Mother Teresa was a Grade A collectivist. I think being a socialist is very consistent with being religious. I also don’t think it’s shocking that a lot of the more fiscally liberal Republicans like Bush and Santorum are also very religious.

  13. The Pope’s recent experience with the Kirschner’s should have told him, that there are few decent minded civic leaders, and many who are not, the latter do seem to believe in the proponderance of the state in all things, supplanting every institution of civil society,

  14. Rush is guilty of the same miscue as the drive-bys=he makes a shallow interpretation of the Pope’s comments with little understanding o Catholic teachings. The catechism expressly condemns communism and socialism. It gives qualified support to capitalism. It is Christianity 101 to condemn greed and the widening gap between the rich and the poor. The Church always gives preferential option for the poor. The Bible clearly says that the love of money is the root of all evil.

    1. Where does the love of taking other people’s money fall on the church’s spectrum? Christianity 101 condemns the gap between the rich and poor? Don’t you people consider envy a sin?

    2. If the pope said “unfettered capitalism” as Rush said, he was indeed parroting a leftist phrase. I’m a former Catholic and I could se the hypocrisies of the church when I was a 10 year old in parochial school. While there are good, Christian Catholics, I believe the church as a whole has strayed from the path.

    3. One of the strongest condemnations of atheistic communism came from a pope, Pope Pius XI, in 1937, in his encyclical, Divini Redemptoris (Divine Redeemer) and going back to 1846 at the outset of Marxism, Pius IX began the Catholic Church’s condemnation of communism.

      But don’t take my word for it. The following 5 paragraphs are taken from Pius XI encyclical, Divini Redemptoris, and in no uncertain terms condemns atheistic communism.

      DIVINI REDEMPTORIS
      ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI
      ON ATHEISTIC COMMUNISM
      TO THE PATRIARCHS, PRIMATES,
      ARCHBISHOPS, BISHOPS, AND OTHER ORDINARIES
      IN PEACE AND COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC SEE.

      Venerable Brethren, Health and Apostolic Benediction.

      The promise of a Redeemer brightens the first page of the history of mankind, and the confident hope aroused by this promise softened the keen regret for a paradise which had been lost. It was this hope that accompanied the human race on its weary journey, until in the fullness of time the expected Savior came to begin a new universal civilization, the Christian civilization, far superior even to that which up to this time had been laboriously achieved by certain more privileged nations.

      2. Nevertheless, the struggle between good and evil remained in the world as a sad legacy of the original fall. Nor has the ancient tempter ever ceased to deceive mankind with false promises. It is on this account that one convulsion following upon another has marked the passage of the centuries, down to the revolution of our own days. This modern revolution, it may be said, has actually broken out or threatens everywhere, and it exceeds in amplitude and violence anything yet experienced in the preceding persecutions launched against the Church. Entire peoples find themselves in danger of falling back into a barbarism worse than that which oppressed the greater part of the world at the coming of the Redeemer.

      3. This all too imminent danger, Venerable Brethren, as you have already surmised, is bolshevistic and atheistic Communism, which aims at upsetting the social order and at undermining the very foundations of Christian civilization .

      4. In the face of such a threat, the Catholic Church could not and does not remain silent. This Apostolic See, above all, has not refrained from raising its voice, for it knows that its proper and social mission is to defend truth, justice and all those eternal values which Communism ignores or attacks. Ever since the days when groups of “intellectuals” were formed in an arrogant attempt to free civilization from the bonds of morality and religion, Our Predecessors overtly and explicitly drew the attention of the world to the consequences of the dechristianization of human society. With reference to Communism, Our Venerable Predecessor, Pius IX, of holy memory, as early as 1846 pronounced a solemn condemnation, which he confirmed in the words of the Syllabus directed against “that infamous doctrine of so-called Communism which is absolutely contrary to the natural law itself, and if once adopted would utterly destroy the rights, property and possessions of all men, and even society itself.”[1] Later on, another of Our predecessors, the immortal Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris, defined Communism as “the fatal plague which insinuates itself into the very marrow of human society only to bring about its ruin.”[2] With clear intuition he pointed out that the atheistic movements existing among the masses of the Machine Age had their origin in that school of philosophy which for centuries had sought to divorce science from the life of the Faith and of the Church.

      5. During Our Pontificate We too have frequently and with urgent insistence denounced the current trend to atheism which is alarmingly on the increase. In 1924 when Our relief-mission returned from the Soviet Union We condemned Communism in a special Allocution[3] which We addressed to the whole world. In our Encyclicals Miserentissimus Redemptor,[4] Quadragesimo Anno,[5] Caritate Christi,[6] Acerba Animi,[7] Dilectissima Nobis,[8] We raised a solemn protest against the persecutions unleashed in Russia, in Mexico and now in Spain. Our two Allocutions of last year, the first on the occasion of the opening of the International Catholic Press Exposition, and the second during Our audience to the Spanish refugees, along with Our message of last Christmas, have evoked a world-wide echo which is not yet spent. In fact, the most persistent enemies of the Church, who from Moscow are directing the struggle against Christian civilization, themselves bear witness, by their unceasing attacks in word and act, that even to this hour the Papacy has continued faithfully to protect the sanctuary of the Christian religion, and that it has called public attention to the perils of Communism more frequently and more effectively than any other public authority on earth.

      The rest of this encyclical against communism can be read online at http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19031937_divini-redemptoris_en.html

      John Craven
      New Orleans

  15. Mr. Rush would attack blessed Pope Francis but not RINOs in Congress and Senate.

    Perhaps one day Mr. Rush will start talking about who is who in GOP and in Republican party and explain what he or she really stands for, instead of attacking blessed Pope Fancis?

    1. The Lord tells us to test the spirits.Just because the Pope is a leader of the church doesn’t mean every thing he says is correct,or scriptural.He is a fallible human being,just as you and I are.However the Lord holds the leaders of the church to a higher accounting,because they can mislead the flock if they are mistaken.This is not Catholic bashing either.The entire church can not be blamed for the mistakes of a few.

    2. Okay,I posted this once before and it disappeared.The Lord tells his children to test the spirits.In other words,is what the Pope is saying meet with scripture.Just because he is the leader of the church,does not put him above reproach.He is a fallible human being just as you and I are.However,leaders of the church are held to a much higher accounting than is the flock,because if they say something incorrect concerning the Gospel,then they mislead the entire flock.This is true not only in the Catholic church,but in all churches.

    3. Mr. Rush, having died in 1813, is in no position to criticize anyone. (Benjamin Rush, that is.) Now, as for Mr. Limbaugh, he regularly goes after RINO’s.

    4. I’m a Catholic and totally agree with Rush’s analysis. To use the Lord’s teachings to promote any political ideology is blasphemy IMO. There is no reason or logic to equate Pope Francis with RINOs.

      Up to now, I found Pope Francis to be very refreshing; a man that represented us commoners, the little people without political power. I believe the Pope can still be a great leader of the Catholic Church.

      But if Pope Francis continues to use Jesus’ teachings to promote any political ideology, then he’s no-longer blessed – just another heretic using Jesus and his teachings to promote politics for personal reasons.

      I’m a conservative Catholic. And I have no problem criticizing any religious organization that attempts to motivate their congregation with political beliefs rather than their spiritual teachings of their Holy books.

      1. Nope, but all i hear on the rightscoop whenever anything Catholic happens is bashing bashing and yet more bashing of anything Catholic.

        Never anything good about the Church like Archbishops preforming exorcisms while gay marriage laws are being passed, and not a word when Pope Francis says “abortion cries out for vengeance” Nothing like that, just bashing.

        Just continue to watch this thread, it’s going get nastier and nastier.

        You’ll see

        1. So far you sound like the left in that any and all criticism of Obama is racist.

          I’m not going to watch the thread because I have better things to do. I’m sure there will be some Catholic bashers…kind of a safe bet…but so what? It’s of no intellectual value to the people who matter. People of value understand the difference between bashing and criticism.

          Turn the other cheek and ignore it. Christ did warn you would be persecuted.

          In the mean time do you have anything to contribute to the topic?

          1. Pointing out bashing of any sort, done calmly, is “turning the other cheek”.
            Catholics have seen this for 2013 years.
            (edited to clarify)

            1. What in the hell are you talking about? I told Catholics to turn the other cheek,…actually I told John to do so.

                1. I will curse anytime I like. You may be somebody’s mother but you certainly are not mine by any stretch. Now explain to me what you are talking about or is it that simple English escaped you and you can’t admit it?

                  And stop down voting my posts like a juvenile.

                  It’s apparent you haven’t been at RS long.

          2. Some bashers? SOME?

            What erks me more than anything else when it happens here… is that IT HAPPENS HERE. Where almost everyone is CHRISTIAN and yet can’t wait to rip each other to pieces when the pope says something.

            1. You have a strange threshold in life that sets you up for disappointment. For starters Scoop is hardly bashing Catholics. He put up a topic about the Pope but has no control over what people will respond with. Next up where in the world did you get it into your head that all Christians should stick together no matter what? Show me where Christ said that everyone gets a free pass because they are Christian and I will cease immediately persecuting Westboro Baptist Church.

              Sorry but the Catholic Church, along with every single solitary institution in the world is fair game for criticism otherwise we have tyranny. If someone is bashing ignore them since they posit nothing of value.

              I still haven’t seen what you have to say about the latest comments from the new Pope. Are you that down in the weeds that you missed the entire topic?

              And yes…some bashers. No religion or group is immune from some bashers. Get over it…and so far I have only read one and that guy owes me two minutes of my life back immediately.

              1. I guess I’m a little confused here. You say “Sorry but the Catholic Church, along with every single solitary institution in the world is fair game for criticism otherwise we have tyranny.” but then when the Pope criticizes Capitalism as a worldly institution you and everybody else immediately flip out calling him a communist/socialist. It seems many people here hold Capitalism (regardless of the obvious corruption that takes place) in the same way that they are accusing Catholics of when defending their Church.

                1. So capitalism is infallible then? Which capitalism? State capitalism, corporate capitalism, technocapitalism, laissez-faire capitalism? Or are we supposed to just blindly follow a concept so broad it has little meaning?

                2. Well of course, but economic theory is not just pure capitalism, pure socialism, or nothing. There are many economic theories close to capitalism but not anarcho-capitalist. Again, Catholic social teaching would suggest ‘Distributism’ is their preferred economic model which is their right to subscribe to. Why bother freaking out over a religious institution that has no authority over you or your country over something so broad and abstract?

                3. No one’s freaking out. The Pope has (political) influence beyond his religious position, so I do think its worthy of discussion. I am not familiar with Distributism but it seems to be a form of collectivism and largely theoretical. And I’m pretty sure the Pope does believe in wealth distribution.

                4. “The Pope has (political) influence beyond his religious position, so I do think its worthy of discussion.”

                  It’s fine for discussion but I do think you’re overstating the Pope’s political influence. The U.S. since its inception has been anti-Catholic and extremely paranoid regarding its followers.

                  “And I’m pretty sure the Pope does believe in wealth distribution.”

                  Yes, through charity not mandated by the state.

                  “I am not familiar with Distributism but it seems to be a form of collectivism and largely theoretical.”

                  Yes it’s largely theoretical, as is every economic theory. Pure capitalism, has never been instituted anywhere in history.

                5. Umm…I think you have failed to read. I haven’t as of yet criticized the Pope’s comments. I will now. In reality it depends on the context of the comments. And I did say every institution in the world is fair game but the problem with your analysis is capitalism is not an institution of any type. Capitalism is a system run by imperfect men and those men are fair game for criticism. Now if the context is correct as being purported then Rush’s criticism is correct and the Pope himself is a hypocrite along with the Catholic Church itself.

                  Sure capitalism has it’s failing because people aren’t perfectly moral. However capitalism has done far more good in the world than communism ever could since communism by it’s design is a failure from the start. The Catholic Church built it’s wealth on capitalism. That is an undeniable fact. Another undeniable fact is some of that capitalistic wealth building they did was immoral. The Catholic church has a very long and storied history.

            1. Jan I already was all over that told thread and that wasn’t bashing…that was his experience with the Church and it wasn’t good. Like I said the Catholic church is not beyond reproach and it is beginning to sound a lot like Obama here.

              Are you going to tell me next that it is bashing when one goes to authorities to report a pedophile priest?

          1. Yeah, because it is usually followed by utter BS like THIS:

            Last Pope was a Nazi, and pedophile hider. This one is a communist? Well, the Catholic church, in all its forms doesn’t seem Biblical to me. They have an agenda too – priests not getting married, the hierarchy and dominance in 3rd worlds. I grew up in a “Catholic” environment, and I’ve seldom seen such hypocrisy – Oh, except for the left. My “friend” is both a Catholic, and a Democrat who has been waiting for this day of Socialized medicine. But how can she believe in abortion and be a Catholic, be in favor of the absence of mind, and for socialism/communism – she refused to budge. The leadership of the Catholic church also has an agenda that is conducive to the UN’s (watch “Agenda”, then “Agenda 21” documentaries) and that agenda is similar to communism and Islamism, but it redistributes under the guise of philanthropic intentions – Mr. Soros is happy. Certainly there are followers, or “sheep” in the congregations that are righteous and well intentioned, but hell is paved with such. Watch the “Story of your Enslavement” ~ Mediaaccess

            EVERY SINGLE TIME.

              1. Laurel, if you have not noticed for the past century the mainstream media has been attacking the Catholic Church. J.B. is not a nut job he is just tired of our religion being singled out for the same things that people in every religion do. If you are a conservative, then you probably feel that way when they insult the tea party etc. So I guess you are liberal because they believe it is O.k. to insult any idea you disagree with and then resort to name calling, just as you have done.

                1. What name calling? The nutjob that posted the tin foil hat pablum? Excuse me that was IN DEFENSE of the Church!

                  Ya know I am so sick and tired of people that come and blog that are thinned skinned and patently ridiculous and then scream name calling as a means of deflection when no name has been called.

                  People of high intellect should be able to discern from honest criticism and just plain old unwarranted attacks. If you cannot discern information beyond that of a 1st grader and then must resort to subterfuge and deflection to make a point then perhaps you shouldn’t blog. Furthermore you are a flaming hypocrite complaining about name calling then calling me a ‘liberal’ hurled like an epithet. Seriously cop a clue.

                  And perhaps you guys are so thin skinned about the Church itself because the criticism is warranted. There is no denying the priest scandals. there is no denying that the Church itself gets involved in politics and often times it is of the socialism stripe. Those are things worth talking about instead of turning into sheeple and shutting up and taking it.

                  Funnily enough I haven’t done any criticizing until now and that’s thanks to Catholic bloggers.

      2. As a conservative Catholic, my Church isn’t above reproach or criticism. I believe my comments on this thread prove this point. In fact, I referred to Pope Francis’ comments on capitalism as being both heretical and blasphemous.

        My initial comment was to a person who wrote, “Last Pope was a Nazi, and pedophile hider.” Catholics are not monolithic in their beliefs. In the North East for example, you will find most Catholics are far more liberal, especially on social issues. However, that’s true with all Christian denominations in the North East – Evangelical, Presbyterian, etc.

        Thus, I agree wholeheartedly with you on the Pope’s egregious comments on capitalism. And I know across America, there are many Catholics who hold a more orthodox view of Christianity.

        1. Conservator you have no need to defend yourself. I wasn’t criticizing you and up until this morning I had no criticism of the Pope as yet…and still not much in that regard since really I am still digesting what he has to say.

          If the comments are in the context that Rush has said then it is a problem but this Pope has been taken out of context before. When reading the comments one can also take it to mean that those committing sins using capitalism are immoral. I just have a hard time believing that the Pope would label all honest hard working men and women around the world as immoral…and really that is what his comments would basically translate out to if taken in that context. I would like to investigate more.

          As to my previous comments all that I was saying is that criticizing the Catholic Church is not attacking Catholics and that the ALL institutions on this planet are not beyond reproach. It’s getting to be here at RS that any criticism of the Church is perceived the same as the Jewish labeling everything as antisemitism and Blacks labeling everything as racist.

          1. I’m sorry if I sounded defensive because that was not my intent. I was trying to agree with you while expressing my disappointment in the Pope’s comments on capitalism. In fact, he angered me with his anti-capitalist view-point.

            Pope Francis as the leader of the Catholic Church has enormous financial resources which they use to help many poor people worldwide via Catholic Charities USA for example.

            But without capitalism, the donations the Church receives for Catholic Charities would be miniscule and it would have gone bankrupt long ago. I expect the Pope to spread Jesus’ salvation teachings versus getting into a political argument about the values of socialism.

            Jesus wasn’t a socialist; He was the ‘Son of Man’ who preached too and healed the PEOPLE; not government ills. The Pope should reflect this always IMO. Anything less is not tolerable to me.

            1. Thank you for the clarification. Is it wrong of me to keep hoping that he is misinterpreted?

              I was reading Ann Barnhardt and I think he isn’t but a little voice still hopes. I’m not even Catholic but I do follow the Church and listen to what they have to say as I do many.

              1. Your welcome; unfortunately you have more hope than I.

                I love my Church, but most practicing Catholics really don’t have a great knowledge of the Bible (New and Old Testament). Unlike most other Christian denominations, when you attend a Catholic Mass normally there is no Bible in the pew. It’s The Roman Missal.

                Thus many Catholics, including my sister, rely mostly upon what the priest reads from the Missal. But like you, I also follow other Christians denominations and have enjoyed attending Mass in their ‘Houses of Worship.’

                IMO, it has helped me tremendously in understanding The Living Word of our Lord and Savoir, Jesus Christ.

                1. Sigh…I just hate to think we have yet another battle even if in my heart of hearts I know what you and others are saying about this is true.

                  The Church actually started in with the ‘social justice’ meme far back as the 1920’s and it has become more and more dominant.

                  I still I can’t help but sigh and be disappointed none the less. As the saying goes…’the truth hurts’.

                2. It’s sad to me too. I’ve been debating liberal Catholics for most of my life. Plus, we must remember that the Catholic Church is a religion with strong ties to socialistic nations in Europe, South America, etc. – there are far more Catholics in these nations compared to America.

                3. True….which is ironic because that boils right back down to money doesn’t it?! Brings us full circle back to the topic of capitalism vs. socialism and how it equates to power.

                4. Indeed, capitalism vs. socialism has been debated within the Catholic Church for nearly 100 years as you pointed out – “The Church actually started in with the ‘social justice’ meme far back as the 1920’s and it has become more and more dominant.”

                  That was an excellent point and unfortunately, the socialists won the battle.

  16. Last Pope was a Nazi, and pedophile hider. This one is a communist? Well, the Catholic church, in all its forms doesn’t seem Biblical to me. They have an agenda too – priests not getting married, the hierarchy and dominance in 3rd worlds. I grew up in a “Catholic” environment, and I’ve seldom seen such hypocrisy – Oh, except for the left. My “friend” is both a Catholic, and a Democrat who has been waiting for this day of Socialized medicine. But how can she believe in abortion and be a Catholic, be in favor of the absence of mind, and for socialism/communism – she refused to budge. The leadership of the Catholic church also has an agenda that is conducive to the UN’s (watch “Agenda”, then “Agenda 21” documentaries) and that agenda is similar to communism and Islamism, but it redistributes under the guise of philanthropic intentions – Mr. Soros is happy. Certainly there are followers, or “sheep” in the congregations that are righteous and well intentioned, but hell is paved with such. Watch the “Story of your Enslavement” vid: http://www.mediaaccess.hu/index.php?module=staticpage&id=96&lang=2

    1. Your attack of ALL CATHOLICS is duly noted. I’m a conservative Catholic and in my earlier comment I wrote, “As a Catholic, I found Pope Francis’ comment on the capitalism to be pure blasphemy. Please don’t lump all Catholics as a monolithic group who are leftist loving pedophiles – WE ARE NOT.

      1. How is criticizing Capitalism pure blasphemy? The Church has never officially endorsed any sort of economic/political ideology and if it did it would likely be close to Distributism (not redistributionism) and not laissez-faire capitalism.

        1. Jesus’ teachings where spiritual to individuals seeking to understand their current situation at the time. But far more important, Jesus’ teachings dealt with on how to live and worship God while seeking the path to eternal life in heaven.

          Governments and economic theories regardless of ideology don’t have heavenly aspirations. To use the Lord’s Word to promote any political ideology is blasphemy and heretical IMO.

          1. The Pope pointed out the much written about corruption of corporate capitalism. How you consider that blasphemous is bizarre to say the least.

            1. Does the Pope acknowledge the corruption that exists in socialistic nations? Does the Pope speak of the injustices and corruption in theocracies found in many Islamic nations? What does the Pope think of Putin’s corrupt government?

              Personally I don’t care; I don’t expect nor do I want the Pope giving political opinions. He did so on capitalism and it was wrong.

              The blaspheme was for the leader of the largest christian denomination, the Catholic Church, to engage into a political commentary which was critical of only ONE ideology using the Lord’s word. That’s heretical to me.

              Jesus wasn’t a liberal or a conservative. He didn’t speak about the politics of his time. His teachings about salvation and God’s love for ALL people, including the Romans.

  17. It’s funny, when this guy was elected or whatever they call it, I thought he was a legitimate born-again Christian… a real straight shooter. But after his stance on gays and other questionable calls, I’m not so sure. Not trying to rile anyone… but this guy is on the wrong side of many topics… especially for his position. Just my opinion.

    1. No Pope can be truly born again. The doctrines he has to positively assent to on the way to such a high position will be too glaringly against scripture for him to be born again and continue to rise so. That isn’t to say there aren’t lay/low-level Catholics who aren’t born again or saved. But I believe they are deceived rather than the deceivers and thus they remain in the Roman synagogue. Tuppence.

  18. The Pope should practice what he preaches and open the vaults of the Vatican, and redistribute its wealth. The treasure the church has hoarded over the centuries is vast, and immeasurable.

    1. The Vatican keeps a museum. People attend that museum. It’s not like they hide it in a warehouse like “Raiders of the Lost Ark”.
      Why doesn’t the President of France do the same with the Louvre? That’s silly too.

      1. In the context of this Pope’s remarks, there’s a vast difference between the Vatican museum and the Louvre.

        1. There is no difference. The Vatican is a city/state. He can’t control the assets of the Vatican just like the leader of France can’t control the assets of all of France.
          Francis gives away his own stuff, but being a Catholic, I actually own the Vatican treasures and I don’t want them sold.
          JPII tried to do that back in the 70s and it didn’t work either, cause HE doesn’t own the stuff.

          1. However you want to defend the riches of the Catholic church it still doesn’t negate the fact that solid gold chalices and the like could go a long way to making sure the poor have what they need.
            Having said that, I don’t judge your faith’s wealth or what they do with it. But, when I’m told that the wealthy have too much and it needs to be distributed, then I have a say in it.
            There’s a Scripture with the words plank and speck that needs to be addressed.

            1. Hey the Catholic Church does more for the poor than any other organization. They have the right to keep great momentos of their 2000 year history, and add a little to give glory in worshiping of God.

              1. Did you miss the part where I said I don’t judge the wealth of the Catholic church or what they do with it????

            2. And what happens when the challices are gone? Christ said, the poor will always be with us.
              So all the treasures of the Catholic church are given away. Who feed the poor after all that is gone?

              1. Ok, then it’s fine to allow the poor to remain poor since treasures will finally run out.
                That’s some odd logic, but you’re entitled to it.

                1. It’s true, the poor will always be with us and so it is with stupidity, that will always be with us and them. You can’t legislate it. You can’t educate it out of the population as there will always be those m,ore susceptible towards the deeds of evil. Case and point, Bill Gates, no matter how smart he thinks he is, the stupidity of his actions clearly scream out like a banshee. Bill Clintoon and those like him are the same way. Proven strategies thousands of years old and they know better.

                2. Yes, the poor and especially stupidity. As Einstein said, “There are two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. But I’m not sure about the universe.”

      2. Yes they have a museum for public viewing, That’s not the vault I am referring to. Yes,…. they are hiding the bulk of their wealth from the public. The Catholic Church has a brutal history , and a greedy one as well.

        1. The Catholic Church essentially invented modern science, the hospital systems, classical music, social justice, the Industrial Revolution etc. Brutal stuff indeed.

          1. The very same Romans who nailed Jesus to the cross, those who burned blasphemers and witches to death. The inquisition that torchered people tll they confess to witchcraft , then kill them anyway. Those who fed Christians to the lions in the Colosseum. But hey they are the original hypsters so guess I should give them some slack.

            1. Man, turns out your avatar is very fitting. Whenever Catholicism is mentioned this site transforms into InfoWars.

                1. I have read my share of history thanks. I would advise you to stick to actual history i.e. Tacitus, Suentonius, Thallus, Pliny the Younger, you know, actual secular historians from the Roman Empire.

  19. As a Catholic, I found Pope Francis’ comment on the capitalism to be pure blasphemy. Up to this point, I truly admired Pope Francis as a voice for the world’s population of commoners like me.

    Jesus’ teachings never were meant to be used to spread any political ideology. Jesus didn’t preach to his followers on the injustices of the Roman rule. He didn’t teach that government had to provide for the people. That was God’s responsibility. Jesus did challenge the political arrangement between the Pharisees and their conquers, the Roman Empire. But His challenge was only designed to show their HYPOCRISY.

    Pope Francis should never wander from continuing to educate the masses of Jesus’ teachings and NOT Progressivism. Thus, I agree wholeheartedly with Rush’s analysis.

    1. I was just about to post that. She has been on to him since Day 1. If the true conservative talking heads like Glenn and Rush have any questions about Catholicism or the pope, they should look to Ann for answers and explanations.

    2. Quite revealing. I had given him some credit because of his religion and position, but this piece blows it right out the water. Talk about having the scales fall from your eyes. A fantastic article.

    3. Ann is great but she is also a Pre-VII Catholic. Like Mel Gibson was.
      Any hint of modern will give her red flags.

      1. That’s because she’s correct in her assessment of the infiltration of communism and homosexuality into the church.

  20. Right after the commercial, Rush came back and said that the English translation of this speech is horrible. Native Spanish speakers deny what the MSM is reporting. The French translation is bad. The English translation is nearly criminal.

          1. Rush acknowledged after his monalugue that the translation may be flawed coming from the main stream media.
            I am looking for more reliable translations when time allows it.
            My Spanish speaking friend said that there was o mention of the moral aspect that the pope mentioned. And disappointed that RS would call this great without verification of what was said.

            1. Father Z started a blogpost asking people what they thought of the English translation. Native speakers were saying it was translated wrong, with slang and context that was inappropriate.

              1. No, from what I understand from those who read the original, he said the rich should give to the poor.
                That’s not any different than what Jesus said.
                Neither said, the gov’t should take the wealth, take their cut and redistribute it.

                1. Btw, I thought you said the translations were not correct. Are you sure you’re not picking and choosing what you want to hear?

                2. But, you said it hasn’t been translated into Latin yet? Listen, I don’t judge what or who you believe, but just be consistent, it gives your views much more credibility.

                3. People read it in the original Spanish. I have two kids who read Latin, not Spanish.
                  I don’t read Spanish but others do.

          2. I’m saying that Rush stated, after reading the Twitter replies coming at him, that the translation he received was in doubt.

            1. Is this true?

              “False premise #4: Pope Francis is fully versed in and fully understands and fully believes what the Church teaches and has taught for 2000 years.
              TRUE premise: Pope Francis is a Jesuit and a direct product of the post-asteroid (aka post Vatican II) era. As such, he is woefully uneducated and contra-educated, and believes that the Church was “reborn” in approximately ARSH 1968, and that everything before ARSH 1968 is inferior and/or irrelevant.”

              (From the link of Gothicreader, see above)

              1. That would be at best 1700 years. The church Christ left bears almost no resemblance to the current Church. Worship was on Saturday. There was no Christmas or Easter. The “Christ observed Mosaic” feast days were celebrated. The concept of a Mass had never been heard of. Mary had no statutes of her and kissing them would have been a grievous sin. Idolatry was not allowed in any form. Making a statue even of Christ and using it in worship was a sin.

                1. “The concept of a Mass had never been heard of.” Is this some sort of joke? Ever read the Didache or anything by Ignatius of Antioch or any other direct students of the apostles? They were practicing the Mass before the Bible was even compiled.

                  And how many times do Catholics have to point out that they don’t worship Mary? She is an intercessor.

                2. How many times do you need to read 1Timothy 2:5 (KJV)
                  For there is one God, and ONE mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

                3. Indeed John 1:1 makes it clear also that Christ actually is the God who created us. So there actually is no intercessor what so ever. We pray in the name of Jesus Christ to remember the sacrifice God made himself for our sins. We accept him as our personal savior remembering without this act there could be no repentance.

                  No Idol means exactly that. No graven image can be involved in worship period. We have candles to count the days but they are in no way worshiped. Kissing the feet or ring is a deeply pagan/baal worship exactly what the Bible teaches against.

                4. “The Great Creator BECAME my Saviour!” Christ is the God that created us…totally agree!
                  I admit I don’t know about the candle reference.

                5. Christ would have used the menorah for the Passover feast and Hanukkah. It is in the bible why I referenced it.

                  I was not referring to the candles that come from Sun God worship the Catholics still lite in the honor of Baal. Though they would make some excuse of course saying what is obviously so is not actually so.

                6. Because Jesus was the God-Man, only he can be the Mediator, the one who is between. Between men and the Father, there is the Son. This doesn’t undercut Catholic belief that the saints intercede for us because these saints are men as well. So Catholics (men) ask them (men, too) to pray to the one Mediator (Jesus) in order to find favor with the Father.

                  Mary was “favoured by God” (Luke. 1:30) when she was personally chosen by the Lord to become the mother of Jesus, Catholics believe that they have a greater chance of obtaining God’s grace for their daily physical and spiritual needs by asking Mary to intercede on their behalf.

                7. While they ignore the origin of this practice. They ignore the statutes for Aster and her son renamed Mary and Jesus. You cite no scripture to support this because there is none. We pray to God the Father in the name of God the Son which are really the one true God. The dead you refer to do not hear your prayers and can not hear your prayers. This would go against all the teachings of God.

                  This does fits very well into the Ball belief system. God’s just renamed as Jesus, Mary and other Saints. Not Apollo Jesus. Not a God of wealth a Saint of wealth. Not a God of Travelers a Saint of Travelers. This is Baal worship with much propaganda over 1700 years making all that is actually evil appear to be righteous.

                  Thankfully God understands the nature of man and the nature of Lucifer. Thus your prayers to God are answered by him because of His love for you. But when you truly pray to the true God those answers are many times stronger. The communication much stronger and true.

                8. Here’s your Scripture:

                  Revelations 5:8
                  “And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harpand they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of God’s people.”

                  Tobit 12:12-15
                  “Now when you, Tobit, and Sarah prayed, it was I who presented the record of your prayer before the Glory of the Lord; and likewise whenever you used to bury the dead.”

                  Revelations 8:3-4
                  “Another angel came and stood at the altar,* holding a gold censer. He was given a great quantity of incense to offer, along with the prayers of all the holy ones, on the gold altar that was before the throne. The smoke of the incense along with the prayers of the holy ones went up before God from the hand of the angel.”

                9. Not familiar with Tobit but this seems to be about living people 11:17 makes this clear. I pray for my children and others all the time. Sometimes I feel inspired to pray for them knowing not why. A Prophet would do this more. But he is living not a dead Saint.

                  Revelations is oft times about things that occur in Heaven. 5 is talking about the Savior opening a book. All this means is that prayers are recorded in a book(s) maintained by the 24 Elders in Heaven. Only Christ can answer these prayers. Some needed to be answered later. Rev 8 is the same thing just talking about how in Heaven prayers are recorded and answered. Some prayers take a long time, as we count time, to answer. Interesting information about how things work in Heaven but no indication of prayers said through Saints.

                  None of these come close to allowing prayers through the dead other than Christ who was resurrected and is God.

                10. Well Tobit is about Raphael being sent by God and acting as an intercessor for Tobit and Sarah.

                  I don’t really want to continue with this for days on end and you can obviously believe what you want. I’m just curious as to how you reconcile the fact that the direct teachings of the Apostle’s through the likes of Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, Polycarp were to practice the Catholic Mass, all before the Gospels were even believed to have been written?

                11. Acts 15 makes it clear there were divisions among the Apostles and Elders even. Notice this meeting mentions nothing of Cardinals or Bishops and no Pope for sure.

                  Tobit after reading more of it Raphael seems like a fallen Angel to me. Teaching as in the Book of Enoch witchcraft. Why did he not just cast out the evil spirits by the power of God?

                  I do agree there was a consolidation of power starting during the lives of the Apostles. Ambitious men who used witchcraft and Baal worship to make the pagan people comfortable with the new christian worship. What resulted was a combination. But that is really just a new form of Baal worship.

                  God understands well the nature of the natural man. He will judge us accordingly. I have no doubt that many all over the world in many religions will do their best to worship God He will know them resurrect them and teach them His real truth in the Millennium.

                  I prefer to really know Him now. To learn His true nature and determine how to correctly worship Him now.

                12. Ok Jesus’ last public words were to tell the Apostle’s to go forth and spread the Word. The first they told was the aforementioned Ignatius of Antioch and others. They wrote these teachings down in the Didache which mentions Bishops, Eucharist etc. Again this was all before the Bible was compiled. Jesus never wrote a single one of his teachings down. You rely solely on written words (translated and distorted many times over) from people who weren’t alive during Jesus’ time and interpret as you see fit. Feel free to do that. I will trust the original teachings of the Apostle’s as I believe they know what Jesus intended for better then you or I. If you want to essentially dismiss all of the Apostles and shout “Baal” feel free to do so.

                13. I do not dismiss any of God’s words. Yes we only have the Bible really. I do not believe some of the books in the Catholic Bible are at all God’s words. He does not teach witchcraft. The Book of Enoch has some truth but a lot of falsehoods as well. I stay away from it. I have looked at these books but find none of them consistent with the rest of the teachings of God. I trust Martin Luther and others did their homework in discounting these books as well.

                  I find that the bible is remarkable in it’s consistent teaching of God’s plan. I find what came after the Apostles far more Baal than Christ. I discount the Baal part as all should once aware of it.

                  But primarily I do all of this in fervent prayer to God. Hours a day. Your path may be different than me. God knows what is best for each of us. I would be the last to judge your path wrong.

                  The bible is my guide. I find many people with many falsehoods. There is not a church on this earth I trust. Let alone a person. I go straight to the bible and God. I have basically given up on finding a church. I find teachings that help me but every church has men that do preaching for worldly gain or honor.

    1. Most of the whacked-out stuff that comes out of Francis isn’t reported in the MSM. He hasn’t said anything this egregious until now, but it’s close. This is a pattern with him. His comments on sin being relative to your outlook was a major gaffe as well.

Comments are closed.