I doubt if Eduardo Manalo, grandson of the Iglesia ni Cristo's founder FELIX MANALO can comprehend this very intelligent response of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI to an Atheist. I will not be surprised if Eduardo wouldn't and couldn't write a letter to the Pope with his objection to Catholic doctrines, practices and teachings. Surely Eduardo Manalo or any of his paid and incompetent Bible preachers would be left begging for understanding for having such an unmatched knowledge in Christian history, theology, practices, tradition-- much with reason and faith! -CD2000
Piergiorgio Odifreddi and Benedict XVI. [Source: National Catholic Register] Exclusive to the Register, we publish below the first English translation of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI’s letter to the militant Italian atheist, Piergiorgio Odifreddi.In September, the Italian newspaper La Repubblica printed extracts of the letter whose full contents were published in Italian on Nov. 23 by the German-language agency Kath.net.The Pope Emeritus sent the letter in response to a book Odifreddi wrote in 2011 entitled Dear Pope, I’m Writing to You. The work was a critique of certain arguments and lines of thought found in Benedict’s theological writings, beginning with his 1967 volume Introduction to Christianity, and including his book Jesus of Nazareth, which he wrote as pope.---Distinguished Professor Odifreddi,First, I must apologize for the fact that I am only thanking you today for sending me your book, Caro Papa, ti scrivo, and for the kind words which you addressed to me at the time through Archbishop Gänswein. However I did not wish to write before having read your book, and since various tasks still weigh upon me, I have finished reading it only now.Today, therefore, I would at last like to thank you for having sought in great detail to confront my book, and thus also my faith. This in large part was precisely what I intended in my address to the Roman Curia at Christmas 2009. I must also thank you for the faithful manner in which you dealt with my text, earnestly seeking to do it justice.My opinion of your book as a whole, however, is rather mixed. I read some parts of it with enjoyment and profit. In other parts, however, I was surprised by a certain aggressiveness and rashness of argumentation.I would like to respond chapter by chapter, but unfortunately I do not have sufficient strength for this. I shall therefore choose a few points that I think are particularly important.
