Vatican City, Jan 14, 2020 / 10:32 am (CNA).- Amid still-unfolding controversy surrounding a new book on priestly celibacy, the book’s US publisher says it plans to continue identifying pope emeritus Benedict XVI as coauthor of the text. The former pope’s private secretary requested Tuesday that Benedict not be listed as a coauthor.
The book, “From the Depths of Our Hearts,” is a text on priestly celibacy, initially identified as being coauthored by Cardinal Robert Sarah, head of the Vatican’s office on liturgy, and emeritus pope Benedict XVI, who resigned the papacy in 2013.
The book contains a chapter credited to Benedict, a chapter credited to Sarah, and an introduction and conclusion, which have been attributed to the two men jointly.
News of the book’s existence emerged Sunday, and by Monday afternoon, the contribution of Benedict XVI to the work had been called into question.
On Jan. 14, Benedict’s private secretary, Archbishop Georg Ganswein, said the former pontiff was not informed he would be presented as co-author of the book and had not seen its cover, adding that Benedict has asked for his name and photo to be removed from the cover.
Ganswein affirmed that Benedict had written the chapter attributed to him, and gave permission for it to appear in a book, but said that Benedict had not actually co-authored the introduction and conclusion attributed to him.
“The name of Benedict XVI as ‘co-author’ of the book should be deleted and replaced with ‘with a contribution by Benedict XVI.’ His name must also be deleted after the introduction and the conclusions, because they are texts by Cardinal Sarah. It is simply a matter of correctly assigning the authorship. It is not about changes in content, “Gänswein told CNA Deutsch, CNA’s German-language news partner.
The book is set for English publication by Ignatius Press. The publisher said Tuesday it still considers the text to be coathored.
“Ignatius Press published the text as we received it from the French publisher Fayard. Fayard is the publisher with whom we have collaborated on three other Cardinal Sarah titles. The text we received indicates the two authors are Benedict XVI and Cardinal Sarah. That text also indicates that Benedict XVI co-authored an introduction and a conclusion with Cardinal Sarah, as well as his own chapter on the priesthood, wherein he describes how his exchanges with Cardinal Sarah gave him the strength to complete what would have gone unfinished,” Mark Brumley, president of Ignatius Press, said in Jan. 14 statement.
“Given that, according to Benedict XVI’s correspondence and Cardinal Sarah’s statement, the two men collaborated on this book for several months, that none of the essays have appeared elsewhere, and that a joint work as defined by the Chicago Manual of Style is ‘a work prepared by two or more authors with the intention that their contribution be merged into inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole’, Ignatius Press considers this a coauthored publication.”
“Cardinal Sarah indicates the content of the book remains unchanged. That content, as noted, includes a co-authored introduction, a chapter by Benedict XVI, and a conclusion coauthored by Benedict XVI and Cardinal Sarah.,” Brumley added.
The publisher’s statement followed a Jan 14. release from Sarah, who said that he had in October proposed a jointly authored book to Benedict, and that after the two corresponded over the matter, he sent on Nov. 19 “a complete manuscript to the pope emeritus containing, as we had mutually decided, the cover, a common introduction and conclusion, the chapter of Benedict XVI, and my own chapter.”
Communiqué officiel : pic.twitter.com/1dJcbFJsVJ
— Cardinal R. Sarah (@Card_R_Sarah) January 14, 2020
Sarah said that Benedict approved that “complete manuscript” on Nov. 25, and that the two discussed the matter in person on Dec. 3.
Gänswein said attribution of the introduction and conclusion, and Benedict’s identity as a co-author, was a “misunderstanding.”
Later on Jan. 14, Sarah tweeted that, while he stood by his version of events, he had requested that Fayard, the book’s French publisher, acquiesce to Gänswein’s request. The cardinal has insisted that “the complete text will remain absolutely unchanged.”
Je confirme que j’ai pu parler ce matin avec Mgr Georg Gänswein. Ce communiqué reste ma seule et unique version du déroulement des faits. J’ai également eu une conversation avec la direction de Fayard pour mettre en place les demandes spécifiques de Mgr Gänswein. +RS pic.twitter.com/yZOZq9Y6Rm
— Cardinal R. Sarah (@Card_R_Sarah) January 14, 2020
A spokesperson for Ignatius Press told CNA Jan. 14 that while the publisher is “aware” of Gänswein’s request, it stands by its statement, and considers the text a co-authored work.
“There is no doubt that Pope Benedict wrote the section ‘The Catholic Priesthood;’ and since Cardinal Sarah says ‘the complete text will remain absolutely unchanged,’ then the entries in the table of contents: ‘Introduction by the Two Authors’ and ‘Conclusion by the Two Authors’ say all we need to know,” the spokesperson added.
The spokesperson told CNA that Ignatius “can’t speak to what Ignatius might do if Fayard acquiesces,” and that it will address that question if it becomes necessary.
Beyond the question of how the emeritus pope is credited in the work, the book has been the source of controversy because it addresses priestly celibacy while Pope Francis is said to be considering recommendations from a 2019 synod to permit the priestly ordination of some married men in the Amazon region, where there is an acute priest shortage.
Some critics have suggested that a retired pope should not have spoken on a controversial subject under consideration by the current pope. Other critics have suggested that Sarah unfairly manipulated Benedict in order to lobby Pope Francis on the subject.
Supporters of Benedict say the retired pope has been encouraged by Pope Francis to engage on Church matters.
On Jan. 13, Andrea Tornielli, editorial director of the Vatican’s communications office, praised the book.
“Ratzinger and Sarah — who describe themselves as two Bishops ‘in filial obedience to Pope Francis’ who ‘are seeking the truth’ in ‘a spirit of love for the unity of the Church’ — defend the discipline of celibacy and put forth the reasons that they feel counsel against changing it,” Tornielli wrote.
[Editor’s note: Catholic World Report is owned and operated by Ignatius Press.]
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
When the going gets tough the tough ‘must’ get going. When those who ‘knew’ otherwise like Gänswein, and Fr Fessio SJ who by all indication [Fessio has reproved the Pontiff regarding silence on Vigano’s allegations] disagrees with Pope Francis’ management of the Church it’s admission they are Gun Shy. They step up to the field of combat but disappear to their drawing rooms when combat is inevitable. And required. That includes Benedict XVI. While his “counter narratives” show he does not support Pope Francis’ doctrinal ideology Gänswein repeatedly chortles how fervently Benedict loves Francis and is totally obedient to the Pope. Witness to the faith has nothing to do with respect of the office and obedience. That is the perceived dilemma of the Church that a few good men are lacking. That was until this article appeared showing that Fr Fessio’s Ignatius Press announced by Pres Mark Brumley that it will retain Benedict XVI as co author on their edition as conveyed in the Fayard French edition of the now universally controversial book. And citing key passages by Benedict that convince he willingly was co author despite Msgr Gänswein’s perhaps overly protective denials. As to Fayard submitting to Cardinal Sarah’s piously submissive request that Benedict be removed as co author – to be possibly complied in consequence by Ignatius Press that would be an error of moral integrity. It’s clear by what Benedict wrote that he intended to be in full compliance with Cardinal Sarah. The Church, the beleaguered laity as well as presbyter sorely need a few good men to step up and defend the truth and shed light amid the Darkness.
Thank you Father Morello. “The Church…sorely need a few good men to step up and defend the truth…” and maybe, the Lord Jesus is waiting for just that. Jesus said, some do not marry for the sake of the Kingdom of God. Priests are His mouth and hands to bring us the Eucharist. This morning I had a painful leg and did not know if I could walk up to receive communion, I prayed to offer it for Priests, and instantly my pain was gone. The Lord loves his Priests. Thank you Ignatius Press, it will be a great read.
Thanks for your commentary. I can only wish there were at a few more brave members of the clergy like you, in your defense of the Church.
The irony is this issue is about priestly celibacy. Priestly celibacy is usually presented as this “beautiful jewel,” but it is fairly rare that I’ve seen people remark on the more practical aspects–ones that St. Paul alludes to. Sure, we today talk about what would happen if the priest were to be married, and children, and parish expenses, and then a divorce and maybe an annulment, etc.
.
Telling the truth, while pleasing to God, is often not pleasing to Man. It can be very costly in terms of broken family/friendship relationships, financial loss (maybe loss of a job and therefore income.) Not so much in the West, but fairly common in some other parts of the world and certainly in the early years of Christianity, telling the Truth and spreading the Gospel came at the loss of life. And in rather horrifying ways.
.
But this is the West, in the 21st Century, and these celibate men are hardly at risk of being driven out, stripped of their clothes, to freeze to death on a frozen pond (Forty Martyrs of Sevaste). And supposedly Pope Francis is totally behind “the celibate priesthood” and not at all opening up the Roman rite to married men.
.
So…what is to fear? The book might be a good book, but their actions, all this back tracking–they look pretty limp wristed and silly.
The book will sell well and therefore fits the publisher’s business model, while supporting the livelihoods of some IP dedicated employees whose work I respect as a former IP author. At the same time, it appears to further a tragic ending for Pope Benedict, a formidable theologian whose remarkable intellect may be intact, while at the same time his emotional frailty leaves him vulnerable to manipulation. In full stride, it is hard to believe that he would have wanted to be remembered this way. He deserves better than to be seen as a tool of what Walter J. Ong, S.J. described years ago as a ‘barbarian within’ in a collection of essays by that title.
James you have hit the nail on the head. Not only manipulated but surreptitiously exploited also.
Do you have special inside knowledge or evidence you’d like to share to back up your accusations? Keep in mind that Fr. Joseph Fession, founder of Ignatius Press and head editor, has been friends with Joseph Ratzinger since the early 1970s, and that Ignatius Press has been translating and publishing the works of Ratzinger/Benedict since the early 1980s. Slinging around unsubstantiated accusations such as these are certainly not very Catholic, are they?
James Casper describes Pope Benedict XVI as “a formidable theologian whose remarkable intellect may be intact, while at the same time his emotional frailty leaves him vulnerable to manipulation”, adding: “He deserves better….”
Exactly.
As present events unfold, I’m reminded of CS Lewis’ novel That Hideous Strength, most particularly its depiction of a progressive, narcissistic, post-Truth inner circle of manipulative highly-placed movers and shakers (the NICE) who use mis-direction, gaslighting, ambiguity, cognitive dissonance, and marginalization as tools to maintain both their power and their façade. The last men (and women) standing in opposition to NICE is a small, quite humble group of faithful Christians that Cardinal Sarah and Benedict XVI would (in my humble estimation) have fit into quite nicely.
No, I’m not advocating that our present pontificate equals NICE. But something quite untoward is going on. We’re not complete fools. Peons, maybe; even, yes, fools; but not complete fools.
Thanks to Ignatius Press and Fr Fessio for publishing FDOH in service to Christ, the Church and our pope.
Wonder who is doing the “manipulating”? Francis and his cohorts seem to be pretty adept at it.
How do you know Benedict XVI is emotionally frail? I think he’s both mentally and emotionally sound and well aware of what’s going on within the Church.
On a side note, you must have gone to SLU because the only people who ever mention Walter J. Ong went to SLU.
Ignatius Press knows they’ll lose sales if they can’t have Benedict’s name on the front jacket, ha ha.
“Ratzinger and Sarah — who describe themselves as two Bishops ‘in filial obedience to Pope Francis’”
That a pope emeritus can be said to under filial obedience to the current pope… an oddity that is a consequence only of Latin ecclesiology?
No, not an oddity; he is under filial obedience because he is no longer the pope.
in the mind of our modern-day sedevacantists, he never stopped being the pope.
Or he never was. According to some, the last true Pope was John XXIII, or Pius X. or…(you choose). Good for Fr. Fessio for not making changes! I’ve preordered the book.
I think we are obligated to move our Holy Father to a safe haven, so we can ask him directly, don’t you?
She’s right.
From The Creative Catholic: Vivian Dudro:
CWR: What books would you recommend?
Dudro: The Elements of Style by E.B. White and William Strunk is a classic guide to good writing. Here at Ignatius Press we mostly follow The Chicago Manual of Style.
Benedict XVI has always been sensitive to criticism; he offered his resignation 3 times after he wrote the Dominus Gesù but John Paul II refused to accept it. May Ignatius Press remain firm.
Please explain to readers why the pope emeritus’ honest request is somehow subject to “the Chicago Manual of Style.” What a horribly insulting, ridiculous reply! Chicago trumps a pope! How utterly absurd! Please back up, take a deep breath, and honor the pope’s wishes.
Father Fessio’s point is that attribution of authorship has to follow established rules. In the American academic and publishing worlds, The Chicago Manual of Style is the final arbiter of many things. Two people I know in the academic world, neither a practicing Catholic, smiled broadly yesterday when they saw Father Fessio’s use of the work.
Steve Jobs knew about the The Chicago Manual of Style, and recommended it in two works few people have read, Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines and the Apple Publications Style Guide. From Apple Publications Style Guide, 2009-08-20:
The Apple Publications Style Guide covers style and usage issues, and is the key reference for how Apple uses language. Consult it whenever you have a question about the preferred style of particular terms.
For issues that aren’t covered in the Apple Publications Style Guide, Apple recommends three other works: The American Heritage Dictionary, The Chicago Manual of Style, and Words Into Type. When these books give conflicting rules, The Chicago Manual of Style takes precedence for questions of usage and The American Heritage Dictionary for questions of spelling.
This tempest in a teapot is just silly. So Benedict retired. Does that mean he has to crawl down a hole and be silent or he’s a renegade? People write books all the time. And, to bicker over wording between being a coauthor or a contributor is just petty. Either way, he wrote some of the book. That’s all the readers care about.
There’s a slang term – scarlet fever – that describes watching the political ins and outs of the curia as if it were a gladiator fight. Read the gospels. Political maneuvering never comes to anything in Jesus’ church. Think of the time when the mother of James and John wanted them enthroned with Jesus, and he just said that it wasn’t for him to do and then explained that leadership’s not such a perk in the Church, anyway.
All this political fussing is just sound and fury signifying nothing.
Interesting that we have such a surplus of clergy over there that our Pope emeritus, (I believe that functionally makes him a retired cardinal, no disrespect at all intended) has an archbishop appointed as his private secretary. Wouldn’t it make more sense to have a competent priest or even layman handle his affairs? I seriously doubt the office of an archbishop was intended for such duties when the affairs of the Church so desperately need the attention of competent administrators instead of those who now conduct them.
As for the authorship of the book, did these two collaborators become mentally incompetent and mute after this work was published? Why not just ask each of them to state for the record what their contributions were. If either one disavows authorship or influence regarding any part of the book, that part of the work should be attributed to the other. End of story and of “controversy”. Truly a manufactured tempest in a teapot.
I agree with Terry Trombley regarding a “surplus of clergy”. It seems to me that the Vatican is overloaded with clergy who could serve a greater purpose out in the world where priests are sorely needed. Like the Amazon area for instance?
So sad. Pathetic even. In The Church, in politics, and the world in general, the list of old men (and women) who should have stepped (or been pushed) from the stage years ago and yet desperately cling to their pretense of vigor and relevance is endless. To paraphrase Henry II, “Who will deliver me from (these) meddlesome (boomers)?”
As for Fr. Joseph Fession, he stopped being a publisher and scholar years ago. He is now just an angry old man screeching at a world with utterly no interest in his questions or answers. With the death of his generation, Ignatius Press, First Things, EWTN, will all (along with their luddite worldview, politics, theology, and dogmatic obsessions) cease to exist.
For years, I have somehow missed that CWR is subservient to Ignatius Press. This saddens me immensely. Like the National Catholic Register and EWTN, no man (or journalistic enterprise) can serve two masters.
“… the list of old men (and women) who should have stepped (or been pushed) from the stage…”
Ageism, pure and simple.
“…is endless.”
Would you include Pope Francis? If not, why not?
“As for Fr. Joseph Fession…”
It’s “Fessio”.
“… he stopped being a publisher…”
He did? When? And, if so, why is he still head editor of Ignatius Press? Why does he come into the office every day?
“He is now just an angry old man screeching…”
More ageism. Also ad hominem. Also lies. Have you actually even seen and heard Fr. Fessio talk?
“With the death of his generation…”
More ageism. What’s your issue with people who are older than you?
“Ignatius Press, First Things, EWTN, will all (along with their luddite worldview, politics, theology, and dogmatic obsessions) cease to exist.”
You’re beclowning yourself. “Luddite”? Which explains, I suppose, why Ignatius Press was one of the first Catholic publishers to embrace e-books.
“For years, I have somehow missed that CWR is subservient to Ignatius Press.”
Not sure how you missed that CWR was founded by Fr. Fessio and has been owned and operated by Ignatius Press from the beginning. I know many people older than you who figured it out very quickly. Not that it’s been a secret.
“This saddens me immensely.”
That makes no sense.
“Like the National Catholic Register and EWTN, no man (or journalistic enterprise) can serve two masters.”
That makes even less sense.
So: ageist, insulting, rude, insulting, and clueless. You can do better. But hurry: you are aging.
In another post, Mr. Busby said that he is “a combat-wounded Vietnam veteran.” Given that the Vietnam War ended 45 years ago and he would presumably have been at least 18 when he served, he’s at least 63 now. That makes him a baby boomer. Perhaps he is gauging the relevance of other old men by his own.
Also, he didn’t paraphrase Henry II. The quotation provided by a contemporary is “ What miserable drones and traitors have I nourished and brought up in my household, who let their lord be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born cleric?” Interesting that Mr. Busby appears to want all those old men (and women) whose existence offends him so to be murdered.
Randell, do you propose age discrimination?
Our age surely isn’t something to be held against us or that we have the power to change. In many cases folks actually gain wisdom with age. It’s not a bad thing.
A case can just as easily be made that many of the Church’s problems lie with certain old men (and women) who still live in the 1960’s.
Who takes liberal Catholics seriously? Nobody at all. Certainly not the posthumanist progressives whom they serve as useful idiots.
If willful ignorance was a capital offense, you’d be sitting on death row, Busby.
What’s all this REALLY about? First, as usual, the battle begins in the mind but is decided in the body, especially in sex, and the Church’s next generation hinges on whether we CHOOSE to be holy in the body/sex and celebrate Priestly Celibacy as the greatest form of continuing incarnation of Jesus Celibacy and Total Consecration to the Father… or we do not. Faith begins by hearing and hearing by the Word of Christ (Romans 10:17), but that Faith is totally wanting, weak, increasingly false and useless if it does not continue in the BODY, permeating and transforming it completely in obedience to God. Either we become sex-obsessed beasts or God-Centered Real Humans IN THE BODY.
Second, how do you best infiltrate sexual perversions? By rampant politicization. Pope Francis has not been called “The Political Pope” (check the book by George Neumayr) for nothing, and the results are so pathetic as prelates scurry to earn his favor and fear him long before they fear God. Politicization is the fertile, poisonous manure for sexual degradation as we have seen everywhere else.
Third, have you heard of “killing two birds with one stone”? In this toxicity of Church politicization, what could be more convenient for the political leader at the very top than to, with one shot, stain or put a shadow of discredit upon two of his most reputable adversaries, as far as faithfulness to the True Faith is concerned? Was Cardinal Sarah REALLY so sly, corrupt and underhanded as to cunningly manipulate the emotional fragility of Ratzinger or where other POLITICIZED actors behind that cowardly manipulation, intimidation and partial retraction?
Fourth, Cardinal Sarah is beyond reproach, well tested even under heavy fire by so many and Pope Francis himself, and thinking otherwise is to worship the Political Pope and his political parasites. Archbishop Georg Ganswein, Ratzinger’s secretary, under political influence, could have as well spoken much more than Ratzinger actually wanted to say, putting him in the even more stressful position, given his fragility, to contradict his own secretary, and to risk making himself look even worse. Satan’s Great Conspiracy against God and his Kingdom started far back in Genesis, so no tinfoil hats are needed to understand this. I also see an indirect jab at Ignatius Publishing, who has not deeply bowed at the Nebuchadnezzar Bergoglio statue, with the same intimidating, discrediting intentions again. We need to pray hard for discernment and revelation, as we are under the greatest, most demonic, from the inside, political attack against the Catholic Church ever in history. Our faithfulness to Jesus in our minds, hearts and then much more IN OUR BODIES will give us the victory!! Let’s be “wise as serpents and simple as doves” (Matthew 10:16), not easy, politically malleable, complicit, criminal clay. We should be clay in God’s hands not Satan’s.
I appreciate your witness
May it all be for God’s Glory and to the service of His People! May God greatly bless you and all you hold dear!
I agree with Phil in saying we have to pray hard for discernment because I also feel that there is dividing evil force behind this controversy. The book in question is regarding priestly celibacy. Satan wants to raise questions, like why priests need to be celibate, if they are married there won’t be sexual scandals. It’s always the same method the serpent used to seduce Eve. Putting doubts into our minds. Stay awake and pray, Jesus said and all the more he says that. The faithful shouldn’t forget what the tradition of faith tells us. Priesthood is a gift from God like other forms of consecrated life. It demands a gift of totality of the person who receives this calling. Therefore, it requires celibacy. PERIOD. If anybody thinks otherwise because of circumstances like shortage of priests or other reasons, she or he thinks merely humanely, not like Jesus thinks. Church is not a institution originated from human, it was established by Jesus himself. I believe the office of Pope is to govern Church according to doctrines, dogmas, teachings handed down to this generation over two thousand years, and teach and spread the Truth of Gospel, not to change the Tradition because the Pope thinks differently. The Church should not be affected by the leader’s personal opinions. The faithful should be alert by such behaviors of its leaders. In this age of unfaithfulness, the remnant faithful should be able to discern good over evil, truth over falsehood, and the clergy’s faithfulness to the Jesus’ teachings and himself. We all should obey to God, not human beings even if he is Pope.
In this month of Jan. that honors the saving power in the Name of The Lord , who has shown us just that , in the peace that we have in what could have been a catastrophic war .
His mercy may help us , in allowing this incident too , to draw our hearts more to the good will , in the depth of the hearts of all our Father figures .
Their zeal to protect and preserve what is good in The Church , yet not seeming prideful and condescending /subtly rejecting traditions such as of married priesthood in the Churches that allow same and who too are very much part of The Family – that alone could be what is playing out and the Pope Emer. might have come to see same in that light , through later feedbacks , thus possibly not wanting his role , important enough even now , as a Father figure , to be seen as a subtle rejection of these Churches and persons .
He had announced the intent to resign , on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception – a Feast that also celebrates foundational holiness in relationships and possibly very much aware of what The Church was going to need in the foretold battle against family and marriage in our times .
He had also shown the desire for more unity in the church, thus having brought forth the Anglican Ordinariate which includes married priests .
The Holy Father too, sensitive enough to all these areas in the Churches around the world and wanting to use enough prudence and compassion in all these areas – again , that Eucharistic Miracle of Buenos Aires possibly having a pivotal role in his life , in all these issues .
Bl.Mother , there at The Passion , in silence , garnering strength for us children who too can have many moments of feeling betrayed ,abandoned , priestly celibacy as well as marriage too offering similar occasions , to invoke the Name of The Lord , for the love and grace through The Mother .
Hope that the above book and these not so major issues around same only help to bring forth more such graces into all involved .
It is one thing that you hope, that the Eucharistic Miracle of Buenos Aires will possibly have a pivotal role in the Pope’s life contrary to his words and writings and allowing for example in Germany that Communion is shared with Lutherans and others, as pronounced by Bishop Heiner Wilmer last week, and that it is common practice there already. But it is quite another to imply that the Blessed Mother “there at the passion, in silence, garnering strength for us children, who TOO can have many moments of feeling betrayed and abandoned….” The Blessed Virgin full of grace and the Holy Spirit and full of love for her Divine Son, knowing it be the Will of Almighty God that the Beloved suffered his bitter passion for the salvation of humanity, consoled that she was participating with her bitter sufferings in the redemption of mankind. The Christ and the Mother of God not feeling betrayed but fully aware and willing united with the will of the Eternal Father to suffer this sacrifice for the rescue of fallen humanity to snatch them out of the clutches of evil and offer them Eternal Life.
Thank you for taking note 🙂
seems the words have been misunderstood – 🙂
Bl.Mother , taking in the sufferings of The Son , with Him , who was betrayed
( Judas and company ) , abandoned ( all those scourgings and no one to take hold of the hands of the soldiers who were doing same ) the calls from the crowd to ‘crucify Him ‘ ( and we are not told that there was any who yelled out against ) culminating in Psalm 22 – ‘My Lord , My Lord , why have You abandoned Me ‘ possibly ,in oneness with The Mother and with the children down through centuries against whom the enemy would bring thoughts of despair that had to be taken upon , to destroy the enemy power through such too , by smashing same against The rock of the love and trust of The Lord , for The Father , in turn thus to help us too .
Psalms as a whole , inspired by The Spirit , hearing same as rising from the Heart of The Mother too might be a help to take in its depth and richness more .
God bless !
Bravo for Ignatius Press! Pope Francis and his supporters appear to want to win by the use of intimidation. It is time for a few brave men and women to stand up to this intimidation. Bravo for Ignatius Press!
You know the crisis in the Church is bad when Benedict and Sarah write a book defending Church teaching and discipline and people are upset about it and accuse them of disloyalty to the present Pope. It’s like we’ve achieved peak clown world. It’s also bizarre that Benedict doesn’t want his name on what he wrote. If it’s true then own it. PS: if it’s true no sane Catholic should object to it either.
Ordered my copy and so have many of my friends. All my contacts expressed thanks. Adding mine to theirs to Ignatius Press for making this available to us in English.
It is clear that Benedict was coerced and intimidated into withdrawing his co-authorship of this book, even though it is common cause that he did, in fact, write contributions to it. It smacks of politics and an attempt to attack the credibility of Cardinal Sarah and the Pope Emeritus. Truly sad.
Like most people have already said, shortage of priests is not related to celibacy. I also think that Amazonia should not be given special treatment. Africa was once considered a “Dark Continent”, but it never received any special treatment, and now is able to evangelize other continents!
The Church is the BODY OF CHRIST. “You did not choose Me, but I chose you” (Jn 15:16). It is not a political or social body where you need to think of gender, etc.