The problem (tax exemption-wise) is that he exerted undue influence on the political process by singling out politicians. Here's the original:
Quote:
|
Pope Benedict on Wednesday warned Catholic politicians they risked excommunication from the Church and should not receive communion if they support abortion.
|
and here's one that would have been fine:
Quote:
|
Pope Benedict on Wednesday warned Catholics they risked excommunication from the Church and should not receive communion if they support abortion.
|
In the U.S. we have (supposedly) a "separation of Church and State", whereby the State promises to stay out of Church politics and the Church promises to stay out of American politics. By targetting "politicians", the Pope has broken that promise, in the U.S., at least. Most likely, he was referring to other countries (Brazil and Mexico come to mind), however as the leader of the Catholic Church, worldwide, he has tried to extort U.S. politicians (by inclusion) to make political decisions under threat of excommunication. That's against the rules, over here.
<edit>
What really irks me is that, in fact, there is no danger to the tax-exempt status of the Catholic Church in the U.S. as a result of this. There is way too much money involved. But the IRS felt justified in persecuting an Episcopalian Church because they preached against the Iraq war and advocated using the tax breaks given to our nation's wealthiest individuals instead for the common good ... to assist poverty-level people. It's absurd. I was hoping to spark a discussion of the painfully obvious discrepancies in the way tax-exempt status is used, and of how our system discriminates based on how wealthy and right-wing an organization is. (And yes, it is my opinion that Catholicism is in the right-wing camp.)
</edit>