Pope Benedict: They banned my books

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zynxensar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Don’t make anything of it. Making something of it means that it would be made into something it’s not.

I think it’s worth quoting what he wrote so that people can be on the same page. He never said “They banned my books” - that’s a good example of making it into something it’s not.
“Perhaps it is worth mentioning that in not a few seminaries, students caught reading my books were considered unsuitable for the priesthood. My books were hidden away, like bad literature, and only read under the desk.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
It did get me to look up 2nd Thessalonians Chapter 2 … regarding “the apostasy” that must come before Jesus comes again.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/_P10W.HTM#25

Maybe Catholic Answers can help Pope Benedict roll out a new edition or two of his books for the laity … so that we can ask enlightened questions of our hitherto deprived former seminarians (now priests).

If Francis retires (as he’s sometimes alluded to) … and Benedict is still alive … let’s chip in and get XVI some of those new mental sharpness medicines so he can de-Emeritize and relief pitch for awhile.

Defrocking of book banning Seminary censors and heterodox bullies optional.

I’m trying to look up a list of Ratzinger offerings now.

Pope Benedict XVI bibliography - Wikipedia Wow 68! In English?
 
1Lord1Faith said:
Don’t make anything of it. Making something of it means that it would be made into something it’s not.

I think it’s worth quoting what he wrote so that people can be on the same page. He never said “They banned my books” - that’s a good example of making it into something it’s not.
“Perhaps it is worth mentioning that in not a few seminaries, students caught reading my books were considered unsuitable for the priesthood. My books were hidden away, like bad literature, and only read under the desk.”
Click to expand...
This seems like a distinction without a difference.

Banning of books by a government might mean they are “are prohibited by law or to which free access is not permitted by other means.”

However, seminaries are not states, so “banning” of books at seminaries, just as banning of books by libraries could mean any of the following:
  1. banned books are housed in separate collections in restricted access reading rooms
  2. a special application may be needed to read certain banned books
  3. libraries may avoid purchasing controversial or banned books
If his books were “hidden away” and not permitted to be read openly on penalty of being deemed unsuitable for the priesthood, that is tantamount to banning his books, beyond what most libraries do when they ban books.

A seminary where a candidate for priesthood could be considered not eligible for the priesthood on the basis of having read books by Pope Benedict is a good example of making the issue into something quite significant. Not sure what you mean by “something it’s not,” because it is clearly SOMETHING.
Click to expand...
 
HarryStotle said:
Not sure what you mean by “something it’s not,” because it is clearly SOMETHING.
Click to expand...
“something it’s not” should be self explanatory. Pope Benedict didn’t say “They banned my books”. I’m not sure what you’re confused about. Also, I didn’t say that it wasn’t something.

It’s being sloppy to go around changing quotes and then declaring that there’s no distinction between what was actually written and what’s been made up.
 
Last edited:
1Lord1Faith said:
40.png
HarryStotle:
Not sure what you mean by “something it’s not,” because it is clearly SOMETHING.
Click to expand...
“something it’s not” should be self explanatory. Pope Benedict didn’t say “They banned my books”. I’m not sure what you’re confused about. Also, I didn’t say that it wasn’t something.

It’s being sloppy to go around changing quotes and then declaring that there’s no distinction between what was actually written and what’s been made up.
Click to expand...
So your claim is that libraries are not ACTUALLY “banning” books when they house them in separate collections in restricted access reading rooms, require a special application to read them, or avoid purchasing certain books?

And seminaries are not actually “banning” books when they jeopardize the aspirations of individuals who are put at risk by even reading or possessing them? Not actually “banning” those books when they restrict access to them or avoiding purchasing them as resources?

Okay, then.
 
I am pretty sure it just wasn’t the reading of his books that caused “red flags”.
Could it have been the attitude of self-righteousness that has a tendency to go along with those who think they are right and their Bishop/Rector/Spiritual Director are wrong?

I know that quite a few seminarians I knew, who had attitudes as such and who were more connected to what “they” wanted and not what was best for the Church were either asked to leave, or to make sure that they were getting a balance in what they read.
 
CilladeRoma said:
I am pretty sure it just wasn’t the reading of his books that caused “red flags”.
Could it have been the attitude of self-righteousness that has a tendency to go along with those who think they are right and their Bishop/Rector/Spiritual Director are wrong?

I know that quite a few seminarians I knew, who had attitudes as such and who were more connected to what “they” wanted and not what was best for the Church were either asked to leave, or to make sure that they were getting a balance in what they read.
Click to expand...
What makes you “pretty sure?”

We can imagine all kinds of things, I guess. Have the books of others been central to the “self-righteousness” issue, or just those of Pope Benedict?

When does the beatitude of “hunger or thirst for what is right” become “self-righteousness?”

Merely when it is met with opposition? Standing against opposition makes you “self-righteous,” then?

What about…
“Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

“Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Matt 5:10-12)
Click to expand...
Would those who objected to Cardinal McCarrick’s behaviour or advances count as “those who think they are right and their Bishop/Rector/Spiritual Director are wrong?”

What about all the cover-ups that are being revealed on the part of prelates and those in the Church hierarchy?

We are living in confusing times when certainty is a rare commodity.

How would you explain this:


Edit: I had to change the video to a different version because of the ending content on the other. I had missed it the first time, assuming it was a video I had already viewed in full.
 
Last edited:
I am “pretty sure” that I would believe what pope Benedict wrote before I would consider opinions of others who are “pretty sure”.
 
I am basing my opinions on seminarians I have known and what I have heard from them and others involved in the formation of priests.

You don’t have to believe me, but I stand by my opinions.
 
Harry, thanks for posting that clip of the cardinals not shaking hands. I would never have seen that otherwise, nor would I have ever thought they would act like that.

Edited: I see that the clip that originally link was “debunked” by another poster afterward. I have not watched the new one.
 
Last edited:
This isn’t the first time I’ve seen that video on CAF. It’s not what it seems. The Pope was not being snubbed.

www.catholicculture.org

Did German bishops snub the Pope?

In the past two weeks a report has been making the rounds on Catholic blogs that a number of German bishops deliberately snubbed Pope Benedict XVI, refusing to shake his hand, during the Pontiff’s September visit to their country. I’m happy to say that the reports are inaccurate. Pat Archbold...
www.catholicculture.org www.catholicculture.org
 
Last edited:
Well that’s interesting, and that article was from 2011, while I don’t know when the clip was from. Thanks for posting.
 
It is despicable that you would link to such an inflammatory video, especially when this has been debunked. 😡😡
 
Watch the video, my friend. When I extend my hand to someone and that person looks the other way; that’s a snub. No amount of spinning changes that.
 
Did you actually read Phil Lawler’s commentary?

No snubbing was done that day.
 
Yes. I read the commentary. And then I viewed the video again. The commentary is a weak attempt to cover up what is obvious. I don’t know Phil and can understand that he might have reasons for putting the spin on the story. I recommend you see the video again.
 
CilladeRoma . . .
I am pretty sure it just wasn’t the reading of his books that caused “red flags”.
Click to expand...
How would you know this over Pope Benedict XVI?

Just because you know a few seminarians who were asked to leave based on what you think, why would this invalidate what Pope Benedict said? (Then-Pope Benedict)
 
CilladeRoma said:
It is despicable that you would link to such an inflammatory video, especially when this has been debunked. 😡😡
Click to expand...
Could you show the debunking please? I haven’t seen it debunked anywhere. You have apparently.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top