So, the Pope's ghostwriter abused his role? And, to make it worse, committed heresy in the process? I read the Crux piece, and I'm not sure I fully follow the reasoning. To my thinking, it's irrelevant how Pope Francis got to the point where he flirts with heresy: he's responsible for what is penned under his name and he should've caught it, corrected it, fired the ghost, whatever. To me, it smacks of laziness more than anything.
I do, however, find the disingenuous quotes and references far more disturbing. The whole thing strikes me as the practice of a clergyman who is too cocky in his leftist agenda to worry about things like accuracy and honest argumentation. And yes, it's troubling that Pope Francis employs such a man.
But honestly, I know nothing about such matters: to what extent things like this have happened in previous papacies, how understandable it is in light of the production process, etc. It's kinda like when National Catholic Register (a publication I greatly respect) inadvertently threw Benedict Groeschel under the bus. I wanted to scream, "Is no one thinking or editing over there!!!" but also realize how nonprofit publications are often stretched to the point of breaking when it comes to manpower, so I bit my tongue (something I no doubt ought to do more frequently).
I built my first low hoop house last weekend. It came out really nice. I hope to plant a huge crop of spinach this Sunday, if it looks like halfway warm temperatures will continue to prevail.