He never condemns capitalism. He says that it will not work on its own. He disagreed that ‘trickle down’ economics would INEVITABLY benefit the poor. It’s not INEVITABLE. It still requires virtue of the individual. It requires someone to be as conscientious about helping those less fortunate than himself as he is about getting in line to buy the next gadget.
He never ‘makes clear’ that the poor are morally superior. He says they are crying out. How does the Pope condemn those with wealth, when it’s the people with wealth he’s appealing to in order to help the poor? He doesn’t tell those with wealth to put themselves in the poor house. You’re making a false dichotomy.
I agree with you, Jesus did not say that only the poor are going to heaven, but he did say the poor in spirit would. He wants us to be more selfless, that is not the same thing as saying he wants to feel guilty about our wealth. He wants us to do good things with it. This message has been consistent in the history of the Church.
Yes, Jesus said we are to be poor in spirit. He and the Bible say many things all of which have to be considered simultaneously. Didn’t the very same Jesus who gave the sermon on the mount also say this:
“For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” (Matthew 6:21)
In my opinion, the power of the sermon on the mount is its turning of the world upside down, taking something normally considered negatively (”poor in spirit”) and turning it upside down so as to reveal a wonderful truth. So, there’s a poetry to the verse, so that the apparent literal contradiction of this part of the sermon on the mount with Matthew 6:21 is of no consequence.
In fact, just poor. "In spirit" is the adjective of "blessed" in Matthew, it is not their in Luke's Gospel. Of course, it is not a way to sort out the saved and the condemned (see Matthew 25 second half for that), but combined with the "eye of the needle" pericope, it is quite clear that wealth is an impediment to salvation, and poverty assists it.
On your previous post, I agree. I love Rush, he did more than any living individual to popularize conservative ideas, but subtlety of thought is not his strength. He should stick to GOP propaganda and leave matters of faith to people who practice it.