UPDATE 15 Jan 2020:
Antonio Socci (not a fan of Francis) says in Facebook (I’m not a fan of Facebook) that Francis summoned Archbp. Gänswein, read him a riot act, and demanded that Benedict’s name be removed from the book. Hence, Benedict asked for his name to be diminished in the book project so as to shield Gänswein from retribution.
Meanwhile, the lib reaction continues.
Two lesser luminaries in reporting on the Church, one for RNS and one for Reuters, opine (rather than, you know, report new) about the SALES of the book. It’s an interesting window.
Also, conservative groups have used bulk sales of Cardinal Sarah’s books in the past to inflate numbers. So caveat emptor
— David Gibson (@GibsonWrites) January 15, 2020
The book is selling well in French. I hope I have had something to do with that. HERE‘s a link!
Note Gibson’s use of Latin caveat emptor juxtaposed to a comment about high sales. There’s a movie with a phrase like, “I don’t think that means what you think it means.”
And note, “conservative groups” are out their buying up copies to inflate numbers of Card. Sarah’s books. Oh, really? Which conservative groups are those? And has no lib group ever done that? Nice try.
Note how Pullela says, “I’ts boring.” I can see how it might be boring for you, Phil. Moreover, you might not be the book’s target audience. And if it is really that boring, inconsequential, then why has your end of the media spectrum gone bananas at the very thought of it?
UPDATE 14 Jan 2020:
This is how the enemy rolls.
- Make a nasty insinuation or ridiculous proposal.
- Let the poison you create bubble for a while.
- Start walking back what you originally said.
- Meanwhile, you’ve managed to gain a little ground for your side.
- You’ve either caused corrosion in some good thing that your enemy did or you have bumped the needle a little bit in the direction you want it to go.
For example, the case of those who want to prosecute priests who won’t violate the Seal of Confession. This comes up again and again and again. Each time it is shot down. However, each time a little more ground is gained, a few more people are convinced that a law should be passed that requires priests to violate the Seal. Eventually, they get their way. It’s called creeping incrementalism.
There was, if memory serves, a scene in Martin’s Windswept House wherein the arch stand-in figure for (I think) Card. Bernardin instructed the patsy stand-in figure for Bp. Lucker of New Ulm to make an outrageous statement and then, after some days, claim in the presss that he was misunderstood, or that he misspoke. The Lucker character was to, in effect, take one for the team but in the meantime they would have changed the topic and gained ground.
That’s how they roll.
Now comes this tweet by Austen Ivereigh, one of the most obvious of the cringing papalotrous out there.
First, we roll back the clock.
A snarky comment to denigrate Benedict.
People much smarter than I who know Benedict well are astonished at his apparent lack of awareness of the existence of married clergy in the Eastern-rite churches, & that viri probati cd be ordained tmro in Amazon using the Greek-Catholic rite. Something is very, very wrong. https://t.co/E5Ot46FIJi
— Austen Ivereigh (@austeni) January 13, 2020
Then an accusation a few hours later.
The truth is beginning to out. Sources v close to Benedict tell ?@juanvicenteboo? of Spanish daily ABC that he never wrote a book with Card Sarah and confirm he is a victim of a manipulation by opponents of Francis. https://t.co/cPgCOhU2CR
— Austen Ivereigh (@austeni) January 13, 2020
And…
Benedict’s people tell ?@bettapique? that Emeritus shared notes with Cardinal Sarah, not co-authored a book. “It’s clear that there is a publishing and media operation involved here which Benedict has nothing to do with and disapproves of”. https://t.co/uGnyAqnDDU
— Austen Ivereigh (@austeni) January 13, 2020
Is there a secretive group behind Card. Sarah and Benedict pulling the strings?
Benedict’s people tell ?@bettapique? that Emeritus shared notes with Cardinal Sarah, not co-authored a book. “It’s clear that there is a publishing and media operation involved here which Benedict has nothing to do with and disapproves of”. https://t.co/uGnyAqnDDU
— Austen Ivereigh (@austeni) January 13, 2020
Turn to your allies. NB: La Croix is, in effect, Bobby Mickens, who had once lost a job with The Tablet for publicly wishing in social media that Benedict would die. He despises Ratzinger/Benedict.
La Croix reports that there was a lively exchange yesterday between Mater Ecclesiae (Benedict’s digs) and the Santa Marta (Francis’s) which made clear the danger of a book that appears to place the emeritus pope in a “parallel magisterium”. https://t.co/8j91tHLuvW
— Austen Ivereigh (@austeni) January 14, 2020
Then he claims a victory lap while taking a shot at Archbp. Gaeswein as Benedict’s “handler”. See? We were right in saying that Benedict didn’t have anything to do with authoring the book because Benedict didn’t see or approve the books cover!
Benedict’s handler +Ganswein says emeritus pope not informed about form and layout of book, contradicting +Sarah’s account that he approved the ms and the cover. https://t.co/Yf67jA5gsA
— Austen Ivereigh (@austeni) January 14, 2020
Then Card. Sarah released letters and the dance step mutates.
Releasing his inner Hillary…
In the meantime, let’s pause to look at the sophisticated publishing operation run by Card Sarah, Nicholas Diat and their wealthy anti-Francis backers. This from book by @martelf: https://t.co/sRFirq5dhC pic.twitter.com/VXZkbPwoIp
— Austen Ivereigh (@austeni) January 13, 2020
Yes, it’s a vast, right wing conspiracy.
In short… take in the “no one doubts” bit.
No one doubts that Benedict’s contributions are his. But it is by now clear that he did not co-author the book. Co-authors write substantial parts of it (he wrote 7 pages) and are consulted on the cover etc. He wasn’t. https://t.co/tykVBdfiyH
— Austen Ivereigh (@austeni) January 14, 2020
Consider what is going on.
The discussion isn’t about anything substantive. It’s now about process.
All resulting in …
+Gaenswein has asked that Benedict XVI’s name be deleted from the introduction & conclusion of the book on the priesthood and celibacy. He said Benedict knew his text would go into the work but wasn’t aware of the book’s precise form and presentation
https://t.co/lZ1t1Q9EAY— Edward Pentin (@EdwardPentin) January 14, 2020
And…
“Considering the polemics caused by the publication of the book From the Depths of Our Hearts, it was decided that the book’s author for future publications will be: ‘Cardinal Sarah, with the contribution of Benedict XVI.’ However, the full text remains absolutely unchanged. +RS” https://t.co/CTmoTEb94E
— Edward Pentin (@EdwardPentin) January 14, 2020
The left will now claim victory.
Meanwhile, I suspect that their whining will only result in higher book sales.
May I suggest to you readers that you pre-order multiple copies to give as gifts to priests and seminarians?
UPDATE:
Okay… maybe the attacks are right that Benedict didn’t write his section. Maybe Greta Thunberg’s dad wrote the section by Benedict!
Facebook Bug Reveals Greta Thunberg’s Posts Are Written by Her Father https://t.co/CQNQ4i7tv1 @climatedepot
— Vicki McKenna (@VickiMcKenna) January 13, 2020
UPDATE:
Gerard O’Connell and Jesuit run Amerika attack Card. Sarah and the new book claiming that Benedict didn’t really write the section written by Benedict.
Now Card. Sarah responds via Twitter.
Des attaques semblent insinuer un mensonge de ma part. Ces diffamations sont d’une gravité exceptionnelle. Je donne dès ce soir les premières preuves de ma proche collaboration avec Benoît XVI pour écrire ce texte en faveur du célibat. Je m’exprimerai demain si nécessaire. +RS pic.twitter.com/L8Q6NmkXKE
— Cardinal R. Sarah (@Card_R_Sarah) January 13, 2020
Translation:
Attacks seem to insinuate a lie on my part. These slanders are of exceptional gravity. This evening I give the first proofs of my close collaboration with Benedict XVI in writing this text in favor of celibacy. I will speak tomorrow if necessary. RS +
Who wants to hold their breath until the Jesuits apologize for lying about Card. Sarah and Benedict?
And then there’s this guy…
Benedict’s people tell ?@bettapique? that Emeritus shared notes with Cardinal Sarah, not co-authored a book. “It’s clear that there is a publishing and media operation involved here which Benedict has nothing to do with and disapproves of”. https://t.co/uGnyAqnDDU
— Austen Ivereigh (@austeni) January 13, 2020
And Beans is giddy.
looking forward to a few resignations in the next few days in Rome
— Massimo Faggioli (@MassimoFaggioli) January 13, 2020
UPDATE:
How badly does the left want to kill this book?
Bendict XVI did not coauthor the book on priesthood and celibacy with Cardinal Sarah…. story coming soon on America magazine
— Gerard O’Connell (@gerryorome) January 13, 2020
And
my interview with BBC
Is former Pope ‘interfering’ in clerical matters? – BBC Sounds https://t.co/NR99Xj8nQA— Massimo Faggioli (@MassimoFaggioli) January 13, 2020
____ Originally Published on: Jan 13, 2020
As you probably know by now, Robert Card. Sarah and Pope Benedict XVI have collaborated on a new book. They respond to certain aspects of The Present Crisis.™ It is their right to do so.
From the Depths of our Hearts
US Pre-Order Soon HERE for 12 March 2020 release! – FRENCH HERE
“But Father! But Father!”, you pewling libtards are moaning, “Benedict isn’t a Cardinal! He’s a Pope Emeritus! He doesn’t have any rights, because… because …. YOU HATE VATICAN II!”
Yes, the libtards want Benedict to be quiet. But consider that these same libtards didn’t want him to be Emeritus Pope, either. They wanted him to become just another Cardinal again. In which case, he would have a right to make his concerns known… so long as he agreed with them!
They want Benedict to be quite because, like Bobby Mickens, they hate him.
In any event, they want Benedict not even to be seen, much less heard, because with every word he publishes, their mask is pulled a little lower.
A good example of the panic incited by Benedict is Beans (aka Massimo Faggioli), the relentless self-promoter of Villanova. Here are a couple beany tweets. (I’m blocked by him… HA!)
There are some who institutionally need to patch up things.
But others should remember that
1) Francis never published a book or an encyclical or an exhortation on priestly ministry and celibacy
2) in the synodal process, the pope has a role that the pope emeritus does not have— Massimo Faggioli (@MassimoFaggioli) January 13, 2020
In other words, “Shut up!”
And… in full panic mode…
One wonders what kind of example the bishop emeritus of Rome is giving to the hundreds of diocesan bishop emeriti around the world.
— Massimo Faggioli (@MassimoFaggioli) January 13, 2020
Yes, one wonders. One also wonders if Beans thinks that euthanasia might be a good solution for emeriti. THAT would shut them up! After all, old men with experiences don’t have a right to express an opinion about anything.
The best response to Beans yet. As a matter of fact, useful every day of the year. This guy to Beans:
Villanova doesn’t keep you busy enough
— corbenalley (@corbsalleys) January 13, 2020
Sapienti pauca
Homosexualist activist James Martin, LGBTSJ, is taking time out from defending sodomitical practices to sow some jesuitical doubt wherever he can.
This is hard to fathom. I have the greatest respect for Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. Nonetheless, when he resigned the papacy, he said he would remain “hidden from the world.” Of course it is his right to say whatever he wants. But here, he is speaking out on an issue that was… https://t.co/oaGy8UK8Rp
— James Martin, SJ (@JamesMartinSJ) January 12, 2020
“One Vatican source (who asked for anonymity) told America he was very surprised because he knows that Benedict XVI is no longer physically able to write….”
— James Martin, SJ (@JamesMartinSJ) January 13, 2020
“These sources wondered how this book came to be written.”
— James Martin, SJ (@JamesMartinSJ) January 13, 2020
See what he is doing? Rather than deal with what may be the substance (which he suspects doesn’t support his agenda given the sources) he is sowing doubt.
([The serpent] said to the woman, “Did God say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree of the garden’?”)
“Did Benedict XVI really write the part allegedly attributed to him?”
In any event, I am now reading the new book in French.
More later.
UPDATE:
Ultra-liberal Robert Mickens, who lost a job with The Tablet for wishing on social media that Benedict would die, exchanged tweets with Daniel P Horan OFM of CTU (aka The Horan of Babylon)…
No one should be surprised. Disappointed? Saddened? Upset? You bet. But, no surprise here. Unforunately, this was quite predictable. https://t.co/DXNNGXuyXZ
— Robert Mickens (@robinrome) January 12, 2020
Birds of a feather.
Inter alia, since most people are saying that the book deals with celibacy, viri probati, etc., Mickens also tweeted that in 1970 Ratzinger once supported the relaxation of priestly celibacy. To which the sane person responds: So what? Ratzinger grew up, came to his senses, recognized that he was wrong, and changed his mind. Errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum.
As for the Horan of Babylon, you can get a sense of the astonishing quality of education offered to students at CTU from these two tweets. I am not making this up.
Another point of theological import: clerical celibacy falls under the category of “church discipline,” the least weighty or significant of magisterial teaching…. 1/2
— Daniel P. Horan, OFM (@DanHoranOFM) January 13, 2020
What else falls into this category, you ask? Your local bishop exempting Lenten abstinence for St Patrick’s day or the moving of a solemnity on the liturgical calendar, to name two. Changes to and regional variations on church disciplines happen ALL THE TIME 2/2
— Daniel P. Horan, OFM (@DanHoranOFM) January 13, 2020
That’s right. You read it correctly. The Latin Church’s discipline of priestly celibacy is on par with not eating corned beef on St. Patrick’s Day if it falls on a Friday of Lent. Conclusion: a bishop can dispense his subjects from abstinence on St Patrick’s Day with the snap of his fingers. Right? Then the Bishop of Rome can dispense priests from celibacy with the snap of his fingers, right? After all, they are merely matters of discipline.
What a brain trust CTU must be!
BTW… some snaps of fingers are worse than others, to use this “marvelous” example from a cartoon (for the CTU grads out there).
By protecting BXVI God protects his people
First of all, I would not trust any of these “sources” if they said the sky was blue.
But that said, we have this thing called “dictation” and this other thing called “speech recognition.”
Also. a lot of writers work in 15 minute increments in the prime of life. So there would be no reason why an older person could not do it.
But like I said, I don’t believe these sources. Benedict has trouble hearing and seeing, but that hasn’t stopped his brother from doing lots of retirement work.
BXVI speaks!
Wow, this is awkward.
Will the “real Pope” please stand up?
Did he just?
This is so tremendous. I hope it is the first volume of a series that deals with synodalism, Amoris Laetitia, Pachammamalism etc. etc. The more we hear from these two the better.
Interesting that Vatican press person Andrea Tornielli describes the work as “a book on the priesthood that bears the signatures of Pope emeritus Joseph Ratzinger and of Cardinal Robert Sarah.” “Pope emeritus Joseph Ratzinger”????? How dismissive does one have to be before crossing the line into total disrespect? And this from “Vatican News”!!!
Yes, I saw right away what he was doing in focusing on authorship, rather than the validity of the content.
Furthermore, when it comes right down to it, these people should NOT want to raise questions about authenticity of authorship; not even for books, and much less so for far more significant publications like encyclicals.
I accept that even though Pope Francis likely had a lot of assistance writing Amoris Laetitia and Laudato Si, they are still words he wanted us to read, because he put his name on them. Somebody should ask Father Martin to stop making
insinuations that Pope Francis’ encyclicals might be illegitimate.
The Pope Emeritus has the right to voice his opinion as any other Catholic. He is not saying anything that other popes in the past have not said with clarity, it’s just that he is not carrying the water of the current thought concerning clerical celibacy that is coming out of the Vatican. The Pope Emeritus and Card. Sarah have a duty to question the reasoning of removing the clerical discipline of celibacy and whether or not it is a wise decision. Pope Francis will decide what he wants whether or not anyone likes it, but he will have been forewarned.
The ONLY reason Benedict is being criticized is because the liberals in the Church know his opinion carries a lot of weight with many of the faithful. Any blame for the kerfuffle over this ordeal falls squarely on the Vatican and it’s German cohorts.
This type of confusion, ambiguity and deliberate fogging up of the Truth has got to stop for there will be hell to pay. “Whoever causes one of these little ones to stumble…”
The comments on Facebook have been most nauseating. Everything from “he should be silent” and “has no right” to speak to “he should not be called Pope Benedict any longer”.
What a bunch of tripe. As a bishop, he has every right to speak, emeritus or not. I didn’t know when clergy retire from administrative or active ministry, that they were expected to go “quietly into the night”. And, His Holiness the Pope Emeritus retains the styles and dignities of the office he once held out of courtesy, just like the father of the current King of Spain.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
Viva Christo Rey!
I have tremendous respect and fondness for His Holiness Pope emeritus Benedict xvi he hs ery rght to let us know how he feels re clerical ebacy. I, also strongly favor celebacy. It does not matter when it was institted Jesus soke clearly about men beng ceibate. And thre would be nobenefit frm remoing the disciline, only even more abuse
“has a role”
…magis amica veritas.
Dear Fr. Z.
You mention on your excellent Blog, “Bobby Mickens”.
Is it possible that “Bobby Mickens”, because of the similarity of surname, is a relative of Mrs. “Miggens” of “Black Adder Pie-Shop Fame” fame ?
Such a similarity of surname cannot be accidental.
I suspect that, “Bobby Mickens” has a, possible, historical connection to a Pie-Shop in London.
Who am I to judge ?
Why not watch Mrs. “Miggins” on YouTube at
https://youtu.be/EOEMRXI3sRs
Even the sheep know when something momentous has happened. It is momentous that this book was written and will be distributed, given the topic. This really matters. They have spoken and defended something we all know is in peril. Interesting. What will Francis do now, his attack dogs all recognize this is a direct threat to the plan, well underway and the ink not dry on the particulars of how it will be done. Will it be hard for him to continue on this path he has carved out? Yes but, his ego will demand it. There is nothing in his papal history to indicate he can suppress that.
Only God could divert him from it.
I meant to add as well Fr. Z., that is an amazing anecdote about your encounter, one to treasure.
You must have confirmed the topic for them in that moment. What a thing to be able to ponder.
First went the false idols into the Tiber…me thinks some other false idols need to join them.
I had this same, at least subjectively the same, conversation with our local Lutheran minister, who happens to be single I might add and 65 too, on our priestly situation and not being married and our apparent low numbers of clerics. Of course marriage will automatically make the number increase exponentially he said or inferred anyway. I told him that priestly formation really doesn’t lend itself to a marriage state, although, I have an ex-Baptist minister friend, who is married, become a priest two years ago after attending St Meinrad’s Seminary. I hold out that there might be a worthy man out their, who is married, who can become a fantastic priest because there are very capable men in the Conservative Episcopal Church who HAVE become excellent priests.
There is a shortage of priests, case in point is our little country church has had a number of Indian priests over the past few years and they just don’t cut the mustard; they are way out of their comfort zone. But we love them anyway. That’s why I have to laugh at Fr. Z’s importance of the “Right Way” to say Mass. Heck, we have trouble understanding our homilies let alone following along listening to pigeon Latin at Mass. LOL>
15 minutes of stamina is an enviably long period of time for a Jesuit accustomed to 30 second tweets using a soft keypad.
As I was reading those tweet-captures, I felt a real sense of evil. The hatred for Pope Emeritus Benedict is diabolical.
The job of a bishop, according to St. Fulgentius of Ruspe and others, is to be the eyes of the Church, like a guard on a watchtower. (Taking literally the noun episkopos, over-see-er.) So of course it is appropriate for all bishops to “watch out” for us and report the dangers that they see.
But also, notice how eager these people are to silence not just the Pope Emeritus, but also an African cardinal. Not much listening to the peripheries or learning from diversity, you notice. They are such hypocrites and racists.
Glad to see the recommendation of this book! Thank you.
It does not not surprise that Fr Martin and Fr Horan aare against this book, it saddens me to say that I sort of expected it. I am looking forward to reading it.
It’s the usual smoke and mirrors game. Distract and misdirect, and throw in a few irrelevant statements cleverly disguised as related issues just to stir the pot. It’s enough to try the patience of a saint.
Pingback: TVESDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit
“Okay… maybe the attacks are right that Benedict didn’t write his section. Maybe Greta Thunberg’s dad wrote the section by Benedict!”
How dare you!
If Mr Ivereigh really thinks that viri probati could be ordained in the Amazon tomorrow “using the Greek Catholic rite” he is ignorant about what “rite” means.
Things have taken a turn which even I, long ago having shed the rose colored shades, have difficulty believing are transpiring in the public eye. We have indeed become a school of scandal. The judgement will not be light.
I immediately pre-ordered the book on Amazon, hoping that the first English version will have our beloved Benedict listed as co-author. How it disgusts me to see the jackals attacking what they perceive as a weakened enemy I continue to see Benedict as a tragic figure–I hope all about his strange abdication and exile will be made clear at the Final Judgment. May he be sustained in his remaining days as he speaks up for Holy Mother Church with his last strength.
If what Mr Socci states is true then I am astounded at the seeming spitefulness Of the Pope. Why on earth would he want BXVI removed from the book?
To all those who saythat Pope Emeritus Benedict must stay silent, I reply: you wanted him to speak out about the “theological” pamphlets published in honor of Pope Francis a couple of years ago. So much that Dario Vigano didn’t mind lying about what Benedict actually did say
Truth is truth no matter what the avenue.
I just pre-ordered the book; hopefully I’ll get a first-run with both author’s names, not an author and “contributor.”
Hmmmm …. mebby’s I’ll order a second copy and put it in the Sunday offering basket (we have a very traditional NO parish run by the IVE).
— Guy
[Outstanding! Put a copy in the collection basket with a note for the priest.]