Pope Francis condemned the “very strong, organised, reactionary attitude” in the US church and said Catholic doctrine allows for change over time.

Pope Francis has blasted the “backwardness” of some conservatives in the US Catholic Church, saying they have replaced faith with ideology and that a correct understanding of Catholic doctrine allows for change over time.

Francis’ comments were an acknowledgment of the divisions in the US Catholic Church, which has been split between progressives and conservatives who long found support in the doctrinaire papacies of St John Paul II and Benedict XVI, particularly on issues of abortion and same-sex marriage.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context

I would settle for taxing them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

I think a better option would be stripping the tax exempt status from the ones that politik from the pulpit. Actually enforce the law we have now instead of being afraid of looking like we’re persecuting them. Hell, they all have that complex already anyway.

Taxing them all would just open the floodgates.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

It’s very inline with the church’s teaching to pay taxes.

Mark 12:17 Then Jesus said to them, “Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and give to God the things that are God’s.” The men were amazed at what Jesus said.

There is no religious conflict at all with taxing churches.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

There is no religious conflict at all with taxing churches.

You gave one example for one religion. I don’t necessarily think taxing churches is a bad idea, but I don’t think that’s a great argument for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Taxing them all would just open the floodgates.

You say that as if it’s a bad thing.

These assholes should deal with a real flood for once.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I dont think the churches that just sit and read a book are really deserving of a “flood”. I also wouldn’t call taxes a flood though, so I’m not opposed to that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Not good enough. They need to strip that status even from the ones that don’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Would definitely be a step in the right direction. I’d even be ok with exceptions for the tiny churches in small towns.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I agree but only because they tend to have budgets so small that they aren’t worth taxing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

At the risk of interrupting the circlejerk here, most churches have tiny budgets that aren’t worth taxing, and run by clergy with very little pay. The other side of that is the established ones sit on land in the center of towns that has been in their hands for decades or centuries: they may not be able to afford the property taxes.

On the other hand, if you were thinking of modern televangelist millionaires, by all means tax their income. I don’t know where to draw the line and it’s probably good to be conservative about it, but some of these people really seem to have crossed it already

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

If you allow taxing churches you open the door for Republicans to just tax every church they disagree with, and I’m pretty sure you can figure out how that will go.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

I don’t understand the problem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The problem is there will still be untaxed churches and all of those churches will be evangelical churches that promote the Republican party.

All the others will be taxed out of existence.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Oh the horror

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 389K

    Comments