A major Republican donor, Langone told CNBC in a story published online Monday that wealthy people such as himself might stop giving to charity if the Pope continues to make statements criticizing capitalism and income inequality.
Langone described the Pope's comments about a "culture of prosperity" as "exclusionary" statements that may make some of the rich "incapable of feeling compassion for the poor."
I'm not sure how much social justice work you can do without pissing off the powerful. And I don't know how genuine the charity is if the powerful can't handle being interrogated. It's a fine balance. I know working in the court system, we'd have to both collaborate and oppose the penal system to best advocate for people that we were serving (part of doing evaluations is trying to fight against people being unnecessarily or unhelpfully sent to jail, which is a major issue, especially for vulnerable teenagers who need support staying in school). I think it's not a bad thing for the Pope—yes, the head of a powerful organization—to anger rich republicans. I think even more so, it's important if he wants to have relevance in terms of social justice.
I'd say too, I know people have a hard time about the Catholic Church—then I'd wonder what people think should be a position of charitable and social justice organizations vis a vis the rich, especially as their influence grows and we experience further inequity, while also realizing that non-profits struggle from consistent budget shortages. Those budget shortages often force non-profits to often underpay or understaff their organizations—which further leads into two problems—wealthy people often run and stay in these organizations b/c other people cannot afford to do this work or these organizations don't get the attention and staffing they need to stay relevant. It's a big dilemma. And one that is very frustrating as you often end up courting rich people who often want to impose their own agendas.
PS. Thanks, Miss Norma Desmond for the link.