Rush Limbaugh going off on Pope Francis's exhortation

[_Abyssinia]

Rev. Robert A. Sirico Comments on Economic Views of Pope Francis in ‘Evangelii Gaudium’

youtube.com/watch?v=mrKGGqErhM8

 

[SuperLuigi]

The problem with conservatives and liberals, is that they follow a very different philosophy than a Christian.

A non-partisan Christian wouldn’t support either abortion or the death penalty, (as currently performed by our government).

A non-partisan Christian would be much more concerned about illegal immigrants living with children in squalor on the hidden parts of big corporate farms than aggressively rounding them up for deportation.

I think critical thinking and philosophy should be drilled into students as they grow up. Add that to their religious upbringing and they are as close to bullet-proof as possible to political sound bytes.

The calls for the ineffective American federal government by the right and conservative sections of the left to deport people (ie working families) just because they didn’t follow some kind of legal exactness is ridiculous.

Some people really do seem to be living in 1950.

As far as abortion and the like go, just send people a check and you’ll still get their vote.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Transcript at RushLimbaugh.com: “It’s Sad How Wrong Pope Francis Is (Unless It’s a Deliberate Mistranslation Error By Leftists)”

In browsing through this transcript, does Rush only actually quote Pope Francis once?

He quotes Pope Francis saying:The culture of prosperity deadens us. We are thrilled if the market offers us something new to purchase. In the meantime, all those lives stunted for lack of opportunity seem a mere spectacle. They fail to move us.

And as he reflects on that statement, Limbaugh ends up saying: “[Pope Francis] says that the global economy needs government control.”

Anyone see in the Pope’s document where he says the global economy needs government control? It certainly isn’t in the quote Limbaugh cited.

In fact, I see these quotes from Evangelii Gaudium from Pope Francis:
*All this becomes even more exasperating for the marginalized in the light of the widespread and deeply rooted corruption found in many countries – in their governments, businesses and institutions – whatever the political ideology of their leaders. (#60)

If we really want to achieve a healthy world economy, what is needed at this juncture of history is a more efficient way of interacting which, with due regard for the sovereignty of each nation (MY NOTE: Ahem…subsidiarity…), ensures the economic well-being of all countries, not just of a few. (#206)

It is the responsibility of the State to safeguard and promote the common good of society. Based on the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, and fully committed to political dialogue and consensus building, it plays a fundamental role, one which cannot be delegated, in working for the integral development of all. This role, at present, calls for profound social humility. (#240)*In reading other excerpts, it seems clear to me, such as in paragraphs 55ff, that the Pope is critical of a particular kind of economics that “deifies” profits and plows over anything in the way. There is no moral compass involved. He specifically says this kind of economics is without God. Whatever in the environment in which it exists that is an impediment to the unfettered profit-seeker is devoured.

It seems to me Limbaugh has this one wrong and depended too much on editorials for his opinion, which is something he used to warn his listeners from doing.

 

[IBombAtomically]

The problem with conservatives and liberals, is that they follow a very different philosophy than a Christian.

A non-partisan Christian wouldn’t support either abortion or the death penalty, (as currently performed by our government).

A non-partisan Christian would be much more concerned about illegal immigrants living with children in squalor on the hidden parts of big corporate farms than aggressively rounding them up for deportation.

I think critical thinking and philosophy should be drilled into students as they grow up. Add that to their religious upbringing and they are as close to bullet-proof as possible to political sound bytes.

I really agree with this. Neither political party completely embodies the gospel of Christ. And when we try to distort teachings to neatly fit into our precious political philosophies, we become followers of the Democrats or Republicans first and Christians second. And we all know that’s not gonna fly…

Imagine if Christians really voted the way we believed. The political parties would look very different. Remember, they morph themselves to fit the votes of the people.

EDIT Back to the topic, Rush Limbaugh is basically a political shock jock and it’s hard to take anything he says seriously. Maybe he’s got a good point here and there, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

 

[adawgj]

Ive just stopped listening to the media.

 

[livingwordunity]

Those of us in the West are probably going to have to answer why people went hungry while we lived. That is a scary thought.

That’s a very broad statement. Everyone in the West isn’t rich. There are plenty of poor people, including many homeless, who live in the West. A lot of people in the West give to charities or do charity work. Are you talking about rich people not doing enough? And how would you define rich or poor? What income brackets are you talking about? What percentage of their income and personal time do you believe would be enough for the problem of hunger in the world?

 

[KP3243]

That’s a very broad statement. Everyone in the West isn’t rich. There are plenty of poor people, including many homeless, who live in the West. A lot of people in the West give to charities or do charity work. Are you talking about rich people not doing enough? And how would you define rich or poor? What income brackets are you talking about? What percentage of their income and personal time do you believe would be enough for the problem of hunger in the world?

Until you pull human beings out of dumpsters and landfills in the third world you will have no idea how insanely rich we are and only then you realize our poor are not that poor compared to so many other people in the world. A lot not all but a lot of our poor in the US are obese so that tells me food isn’t a problem when you see a six year old in a landfill too weak from starvation to fight off a wild pig from eating the kid’s toes right off him then we can talk about what I define as poor. The fact we even have homeless people in the US is a crime Francis is calling us out for not reaching out to people who live right along side us we have to answer for that let alone the fact we hoard our wealth and food and DO NOT try to bring social justice by pressuring and threatening dictators who starve their poor by holding food and water hostage and the only way to help yourself or improve your life is by joining in the corrupt government usually as some sort of killing agent or prostitution which can also be forced upon women. Francis CLEARLY makes it known that spiritually poor are the most in need.

 

[CaptFun]

Since Rush Limbaugh is a conservative Protestant we can’t expect him to like everything the Pope says. He is probably suspicious of us Catholics for the fact that most Catholic Americans voted for a socialist presidential candidate not once but twice! Rush might be projecting this negative onto the Pope. .

3 thoughts after reading Rush’s transcript today … coming ONE day after he was shocked the Georgetown University was unable or unwilling to do anything about a GU Club’s free giiveaway of condoms on campus … and feigned helplessness when the condom group complained of “vandalism” when delivered bags of condoms were torn off the doorknobs the bags had been delivered to.

To a non-Catholic it might seem the Catholic world leadership had gone through the looking glass.

1. It was the Washington Post story that reduced the Pope’s pastoral message to the politically charged word “trickle-down”; making of it an economic treatise when it is much more than that - and a spiritual message much more than a secular economic one, let alone a call to economic orthodoxy. Rush fell in with this … but then the story was out there … and he comments upon the big stories.
2. I thought Rush’s defense of and praise for Capitalism (in general) was well reasoned and succinct. I did not take the Pope’s words to be the opposite of what he said but a caution and a warning not to make money a solution that absolved people from their personal responsibilities toward the poor. Personal responsibility is an ongoing theme of Rush’s show (though more in the vein of self-reliance and citizenship whereas the Pope was actually speaking more of charitable duties toward the poor). I found the terms trickle-down and unfettered capitalism curious as they are favored by the political left
   and (in my opiinion) diminish or confuse the central message of the Pope to the extent that now the MS media has made it the WHOLE message.

The Washington Post article reports that the terms (esp. “trickle-down”) were found in the English translation of the document. Jimmy Akins’ article on the true meaning of the document noted that it is not always the Pope himself that writes such documents; but that he approves the texts for publication. An interpreter of the Latin document into English might inject such hot button buzzwords into the translation as a “more accurate rendition of what the Holy Father meant” if his own personal interpretation ran that way.

Which is why the disclaimer in Limbaugh’s transcript headline is insightful. Certainly the media spins the Pope’s messages to fit their own template (as it has with JPII and Benedict). This story giving the impression that Francis is an economic liberal or anti-capitalist sails right past his qualifying language even in the story the Washington Post published.

1. Further down in the Pope’s document Francis emphasizes a frequent theme on Rush’s show … the dignity of work. Though it is mentioned not just in an economic or political context.

(192) … We are not simply talking about ensuring nourishment or a “dignified sustenance” for all people, but also their “general temporal welfare and prosperity”.[159] This means education, access to health care, and above all employment, for it is through free, creative, participatory and mutually supportive labour that human beings express and enhance the dignity of their lives. A just wage enables them to have adequate access to all the other goods which are destined for our common use.

This spin that Francis has forged a 50,000 word document - the main thrust of which is an assault on Capitialism - gets quickly dispelled if one actually reads the document.

And in fact Francis has talked about work as a necessity for human dignity before. Rush might be more comfortable with Francis’ address of September 22, this year, that more directly dealt with the European financial crisis (though, again always being more of a spiritual counsel than an endorsement of specific schools of economic thought).

vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/speeches/2013/september/documents/papa-francesco_20130922_lavoratori-cagliari_en.html

Where there is no work there is no dignity! And this is not only a problem in Sardinia — but it is serious here! — it is not only a problem in Italy or in certain European countries, it is the result of a global decision, of an economic system which leads to this tragedy; an economic system centred on an idol called “money”.

God did not want an idol to be at the centre of the world but man, men and women who would keep the world going with their work. Yet now, in this system devoid of ethics, at the centre there is an idol and the world has become an idolater of this “god-money”.

Money is in command! Money lays down the law! It orders all these things that are useful to it, this idol. And what happens? To defend this idol all crowd to the centre and those on the margins are done down, the elderly fall away, because there is no room for them in this world! Some call this habit “hidden euthanasia”, not caring for them, not taking them into account… “No, let’s not bother about them…”.

And the young who do not find a job collapse, and their dignity with them. Do you realize that in a world where youth — two generations of young people — have no work that this world has no future Why? Because they have no dignity! Is is hard to have dignity without work. This is your difficulty here. This is the prayer you were crying out from this place: “work”, “work”, “work”. It is a necessary prayer. Work means dignity, work means taking food home, work means loving! … We must say: “we don’t want this globalized economic system which does us so much harm!”. Men and women must be at the centre as God desires, and not money!

– Pope Francis 9/22/2013

 

[Cojuanco]

My husband - a Catholic - just came in all upset because of what he now thinks the Pope’s position is on socialist policies. Rush Limbaugh read excerpts from Pope Francis’ 224 page exhortation. I said “you know he probably took things out of context” and he said “no”, that he “read it from the document itself”. But again, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t taken out of context. I told him to read it for himself and not rely on Rush’s interpretation.

In one of my last months of my classes with my catechist, we covered issues concerning social justice and he showed me those sections of the catechism and we reviewed it and examples and any reasonable person would have to agree that it all made perfect sense. There were things there that would anger Republicans & Liberals alike and please Republicans and Liberals alike. But if one truly considers the catechism on these issues, regardless of your politics, its hard to see (at least for me) how one would fear God and disagree.

I guess I’m going to have to show him the catechism for the Pope isn’t promoting anything new I’m sure though I haven’t yet read the document. I would surely never rely on someone like Rush Limbaugh to interpret it for me. (I have no idea what his religion is)

Rae

Ask him, “who is the successor of Peter, Francis or Rush?” I’d also point out that Catholic social doctrine resembles socialism in some respects and classical liberalism (Rush’s ideology in political sceince terms) in others, because the Church does not reject what is true and good in each ideology. It rejects, as the exhortation does, the errors in each ideology. Such distinctions are often not present in Protestantism and mong Protestants like Limbaugh.

 

[JM3]

I don’t know if anyone noticed, but it appears that Rush is commenting on an article that someone else wrote about the Apostolic Exhortation. That’s what I see in the transcript quoted in post 3.

"Pope Francis attacked unfettered capitalism as ‘a new tyranny.’ He beseeched global leaders to fight poverty and growing inequality, in a document on Tuesday setting out a platform for his papacy and calling for a renewal of the Catholic Church. In it, Pope Francis went further than previous comments criticizing the global economic system, attacking the ‘idolatry of money.’ "

It seems to be a common theme for those who want to attack the Church.

 

[MarcoPolo]

The Washington Post article reports that the terms (esp. “trickle-down”) were found in the English translation of the document.

The Italian version has the phrase “ricaduta favorevole” there, which Google translate says means “relapse favorable.”

 

[Cojuanco]

I don’t know if anyone noticed, but it appears that Rush is commenting on an article that someone else wrote about the Apostolic Exhortation. That’s what I see in the transcript quoted in post 3.

It seems to be a common theme for those who want to attack the Church.

I would hazard even if he saw the original, Rushbo would have still said this. It’s the same old story of coming to trade Lord Christ for Lord Mammon.

 

[JM3]

I would hazard even if he saw the original, Rushbo would have still said this. It’s the same old story of coming to trade Lord Christ for Lord Mammon.

Maybe, maybe not. In any case, let’s be charitable and not condemn him before the fact.

 

[Cojuanco]

Maybe, maybe not. In any case, let’s be charitable and not condemn him before the fact.

Apologies.

 

[CaptFun]

The Italian version has the phrase “ricaduta favorevole” there, which Google translate says means “relapse favorable.”

:tiphat: for your international linguistic scholarship!

I had a feeling that “trickle-down” was an editorialization in the translation.

Maybe Rush had that same feeling. THAT was the word that propelled the story (although the Pope certainly did give a caution about seeing aspects of Capitalism being a certain answer to the problem of economics and poverty).

I don’t know this pope, but I don’t know that the bishop of Rome speaks in terms of trickle-down. One of the things they’re saying is that the pope didn’t say “trickle-down,” that the correct translation would be “spillover.” He didn’t say “trickle-down.” So there are people that are telling me, “Hey, Rush, the pope was mistranslated,” and my first reaction, “Come on, now.”

But then I had to catch myself. They are – by “they,” I mean the worldwide left – they are entirely capable of this, and they wouldn’t hesitate to do it, if they thought they could get away with it. Hell, they wouldn’t hesitate to do it even if they do get caught doing it because they know that the original phony translation they put out will be the one that survives. The truth takes a long time to catch up when the lie gets out of the gates first.

So I can’t sit here and summarily reject the claim that the pope has been mistranslated. I know it sounds inconceivable. (interruption) The pope? He said something about homosexuals and later they said he was mistranslated? His original statement, he appeared to condone homosexuality, and then somebody said he was mistranslated. Well, there seems to be a pattern here, then, of the pope being mistranslated.

Regarding that second thing … a young person in my family started coming on like Joan of Arc with her mother on the subject of “Gay Marriage,” calling her mother a bigot for her traditional view and invoking the name of Pope Francis as now approving of it (which of course he does not - but was rather recommending charity toward the sinner to the Church when sinners were repentant). ON that issue Francis had been clear about the sinful nature of the act.

americanthinker.com/blog/2013/09/what_the_pope_really_said.html

(On so called gay marriage):

Let us not be naive: this is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan. It is not just a bill (a mere instrument) but a ‘move’ of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God. – Pope Francis

By the same token politically charged (English) terms like “trickle-down” and “unfettered capitalism” injected into an otherwise correct translation of the document become quite damaging if that is what was done.

Taken out of its pastoral context and considered solely as an economic counsel, it can
be as misleading as the earlier stories played as a reversal of the Church’s policy toward Same Sex “Marriage”. And makes understandable Limbaugh’s suspicion:

But regardless, what this is, somebody has either written this for him or gotten to him. This is just pure Marxism coming out of the mouth of the pope.

– Rush Limbaugh

Limbaugh of course is doing live commentary, not writing a document that can be edited over and over. I might offer him the following edit. “This (language sounds) just (like) pure Marxism – coming out of the mouth of the pope.” There is of course no speech, so no mouth … but a politically charged unfortunate translation seems to have co-opted Francis’ pastoral message. And now drives the whole dubious story that the Pope’s 50,000 word teaching was all about his perceived opposition to Capitalism.

Again, thank you Marco Polo.

 

[_Abyssinia]

RUSH VS. POPE: 7 QUOTES ANSWERED

 

[IBombAtomically]

Until you pull human beings out of dumpsters and landfills in the third world you will have no idea how insanely rich we are and only then you realize our poor are not that poor compared to so many other people in the world. A lot not all but a lot of our poor in the US are obese so that tells me food isn’t a problem when you see a six year old in a landfill too weak from starvation to fight off a wild pig from eating the kid’s toes right off him then we can talk about what I define as poor. The fact we even have homeless people in the US is a crime Francis is calling us out for not reaching out to people who live right along side us we have to answer for that let alone the fact we hoard our wealth and food and DO NOT try to bring social justice by pressuring and threatening dictators who starve their poor by holding food and water hostage and the only way to help yourself or improve your life is by joining in the corrupt government usually as some sort of killing agent or prostitution which can also be forced upon women. Francis CLEARLY makes it known that spiritually poor are the most in need.

:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping: YES! So tempted to print out and frame hehe

 

[MarcoPolo]

RUSH VS. POPE: 7 QUOTES ANSWERED

This article is well done.

 

[Norm640]

We have had very intelligent, super intelligent men, actually, become Popes. I don’t know of one who actually understood American capitalism. Capitalism in and of itself is neither good or bad. How it is used is what we should judge it by. And capitalism, more than any government ever, has raised people out of poverty.

But before when we had popes from Europe, they either had a resentment of cartoonish view of America, or the context they were raised in - the social democracy/communism- led them to believe that government had a redeeming effect on poverty and that capitalism was merely exploiting the poor. It is telling that our current pope is from Argentina which, among all the latin American countries, is most European in makeup and mores.

Basically, I wish popes would focus on issues of faith and not stray too far into things they have a thin understanding of. The pope, for example, might lump China in the same boat as the US- “unfettered capitalism”. But that is not true. In China, workers aren’t paid what the market demands- workers are paid what the dictatorship wants.

To use the same line for our way of governance, capitalism is a terribly economic system- except for all the others. In fact, capitalism free of draconian government regulation and interference is the single greatest threat to poverty, period.

Or maybe I’m missing the reason why the hopelessly poor risked killing themselves to come here. Maybe now its for the benefits, but it was always for the opportunity.

No worries…we are quickly becoming the social democracy that the intellectuals think we should be. We’ve already got more people earning government assistance than working. Give it time, and maybe the Pope can criticize us on something other than our economy that “deadens” our sympathy for others (which it doesn’t, as the US is the most charitable country on earth).

Like when Cardinal Ratzinger bowed to the “authority” of the United Nations on the question of a just war in Iraq, I am saddened to see another pope get caught up in fashionable and easy hatred of the west.

My husband - a Catholic - just came in all upset because of what he now thinks the Pope’s position is on socialist policies. Rush Limbaugh read excerpts from Pope Francis’ 224 page exhortation. I said “you know he probably took things out of context” and he said “no”, that he “read it from the document itself”. But again, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t taken out of context. I told him to read it for himself and not rely on Rush’s interpretation.

In one of my last months of my classes with my catechist, we covered issues concerning social justice and he showed me those sections of the catechism and we reviewed it and examples and any reasonable person would have to agree that it all made perfect sense. There were things there that would anger Republicans & Liberals alike and please Republicans and Liberals alike. But if one truly considers the catechism on these issues, regardless of your politics, its hard to see (at least for me) how one would fear God and disagree.

I guess I’m going to have to show him the catechism for the Pope isn’t promoting anything new I’m sure though I haven’t yet read the document. I would surely never rely on someone like Rush Limbaugh to interpret it for me. (I have no idea what his religion is)

Rae

 

[Randy_Carson]

My husband - a Catholic - just came in all upset because of what he now thinks the Pope’s position is on socialist policies. Rush Limbaugh read excerpts from Pope Francis’ 224 page exhortation. I said “you know he probably took things out of context” and he said “no”, that he “read it from the document itself”. But again, that doesn’t mean it wasn’t taken out of context. I told him to read it for himself and not rely on Rush’s interpretation.

In one of my last months of my classes with my catechist, we covered issues concerning social justice and he showed me those sections of the catechism and we reviewed it and examples and any reasonable person would have to agree that it all made perfect sense. There were things there that would anger Republicans & Liberals alike and please Republicans and Liberals alike. But if one truly considers the catechism on these issues, regardless of your politics, its hard to see (at least for me) how one would fear God and disagree.

I guess I’m going to have to show him the catechism for the Pope isn’t promoting anything new I’m sure though I haven’t yet read the document. I would surely never rely on someone like Rush Limbaugh to interpret it for me. (I have no idea what his religion is)

Rae

Rush isn’t alone. Read this analysis found at Fr. Longenecker’s blog:

patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2013/11/lets-be-frank-about-francis.html

or directly at:

m.nationalreview.com/corner/365004/pope-francis-and-poverty-samuel-gregg