Rush Limbaugh going off on Pope Francis's exhortation

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)


Maybe post the transcript here if it is somewhere? There’s nothing to respond to without knowing what he said/quoted, etc…

Conservatives and liberals have to realise that neither Pope Benedict or Pope Francis fits neatly into any political ideology like conservatism or liberalism

I do not want to cite Media Matters, but they are the only originater of the transcript. I hope this is fair use

LIMBAUGH: I mentioned, last night – I was doing show prep last night – usual routine. And I ran across this – I don’t actually know what it’s called – the latest papal offering, statement from Pope Francis. Now, up until this – I’m not Catholic. Up until this, I have to tell you, I was admiring the man. I thought he was going a little overboard on the “common man” touch, and I thought there might have been a little bit of PR involved there. But nevertheless, I was willing to cut him some slack. I mean, if he wants to portray himself as still from the streets of where he came from and is not anything special, not aristocratic, if he wants to eschew the physical trappings of the Vatican – OK, cool, fine.

But this that I came across last night – I mean, it totally befuddled me. If it weren’t for capitalism, I don’t know where the Catholic Church would be. Now, as I mentioned before, I’m not Catholic. I admire it profoundly, and I’ve been tempted a number of times to delve deeper into it. But the pope here has now gone beyond Catholicism here, and this is pure political. Now, I want to share with you some of this stuff.

"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.’ "

I’ve gotta be very caref-- I have been numerous times to the Vatican. It wouldn’t exist without tons of money. 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. There’s no such – “unfettered capitalism”? That doesn’t exist anywhere.

Obviously, Pope Francis gave a whole lot of consideration as to how Rush would accept his exhortation…:whistle:


This is true. If Rush’s rant is in regard to the parts of Evangelii Gaudem that talk about the economy (where else would Rush see “socialist policies”?), and Rush finds that so very disagreeable, some Catholics might have to reconsider who will carry more influence with them, Rush or the Pope.

:banghead: :doh2: :dts:

The idea that Pope Francis is liberal and Benedict and JPII are conservative in terms of politics is absurd.

For one thing, the Catholic Church has very clearly come out against socialism.

Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives need to stop hollering that every other this and that is socialism.

Too many times the right mistakes socialism for big government cronyism in political circles.

As far as liberals are concerned, peh, I don’t see them dolling out donations. In fact, conservatives in the USA have them beat on that 4:1----in spite of earning less on average.

People who live in the First World need to stop injecting European and American political labels on our Popes.

A Response to Rush Limbaugh

I don’t know if Limbaugh is a Catholic, but various “conservative” Americans have historically had a beef with Catholic social teaching, which does not see individualism and survival of the fittest as an ethical economic system.

Neither of course is outright socialism, which outright eliminates private property and conceives of society as a class struggle.

Both systems have the same result, conflict, the exaltation of the strong over the weak, and the concentration of wealth and the means of production in the hands of a few, be it the state or some corporations.

The Catholic ideal provides public authority with the role of coordinating and directing markets and the private and public use of property toward the common good, which benefits all, rather than exploiting some for the benefit of others.

Not a Rush fan, but anybody who is not at least Catholic should shut their yip yap about the Holy Father. Just my humble opinion.

I read that Rush Limbaugh considers himself a Methodist. I tried to check it out on, but I guess I must be doing it wrong. None of the things I check ever seem to come up on it

I believe he belongs to the church of “Whatever Gets Rush Attention.” I could be wrong, but this seems like just more evidence.


The best, and only advice, that I can give you is to go to your husband and explain to him that if he wants to listen to political pundits get angry on-air for their multi million dollar paychecks, that’s fine. We all indulge in entertainment, and what’s foolish to some is a great time to others. But, listening to political pundits, as in, people who are paid to be upset and make you upset too, does not count as listening to the news, researching, or absorbing information in any way.

Rush Limbaugh is not news, he’s entertainment. Therefore, everything he says needs to be taken with a grain (or shaker) of salt. If your husband cannot listen to Rush without making this distinction, it may be best if he finds something else to listen to.

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.

As to context, someone could email Rush this, from the catechism:

1885 The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism. It sets limits for state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies. It tends toward the establishment of true international order.

The pope just said that he welcomed criticism.

Criticizing the personal actions and words of the Pope is one thing, while criticizing the Magisterium of the Church (which he exercises) is another. While acts of the Magisterium like Evangelii Gaudium are not absolutely immune from all criticism (the CDF instruction Donum Veritatis lays out the manner this may be done–and laymen taking their complaints to the media is not it), they require a certain level of respect, submission, and docility from members of the Church that the actions of the Pope that are properly his alone do not (of course, he himself, by virtue of his office commands a certain reverence, but not the level of religious submission).

[quote=Limbaugh]There’s no such – “unfettered capitalism”? That doesn’t exist anywhere.

This is where I think Rush falls into delusion and demonstrates some degree of inability to distinguish between capitalism and immoral capitalism that creates the same sort of “dependence” on its target markets as a socialist government, from withholding technologies to artificial science supporting one’s own product.

Plus, would anyone want to call Pope Benedict a Marxist? Did someone “write” this identical assertion for Pope Benedict?
“It is alarming to see hotbeds of tension and conflict caused by growing instances of inequality between rich and poor, by the prevalence of a selfish and individualistic mindset which also finds expression in an unregulated financial capitalism.” (Pope Benedict XVI, World Day of Peace, January 2013)…who at the same time believed:*“The State which would provide everything, absorbing everything into itself, would ultimately become a mere bureaucracy incapable of guaranteeing the very thing which the suffering person - every person - needs: namely, loving personal concern. We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything, but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges and supports initiatives arising from the different social forces and combines spontaneity with closeness to those in need. … In the end, the claim that just social structures would make works of charity superfluous masks a materialist conception of man: the mistaken notion that man can live ‘by bread alone’ (Mt 4:4; cf. Dt 8:3) - a conviction that demeans man and ultimately disregards all that is specifically human.” (Pope Benedict XVI, Encyclical Deus Caritas Est, 2005, 28)*In other words, you don’t have to be a Marxist to think unregulated capitalism can lead to violations against persons. Limbaugh has had a certain value some times, but when it comes to “capitalism,” he responds religiously and obtusely, failing to make the distinction the Church makes.

The Church is strongly against any large centralized governments I haven’t finished the Exhortation but I assume nothing has changed on this.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit