The Five Wounds of the Church
Author's Note
This book, written seventeen years ago [1832] was published by me on the election of pope Pius IX. Intended for a few friends, as I state in the conclusion, it was issued in other editions against my wishes by pirate publishing houses. The result was greater publicity and swifter diffusion of the study than I would have desired.
On the open market criticisms of the book varied from highest praise to abysmal condemnation. One definite advantage, for which I was grateful, was the balanced comments made by certain learned churchmen. This new edition of the work contains the amendments asked for in those comments.
It may well be that in writing the study I exaggerated, in my zeal and pain, the evils afflicting the Church (evils which permit the wicked to triumph and Christ's name to be profaned). This could have offended many of the clergy, whom I am proud to claim as colleagues and brothers while gladly recognising the holiness, learning and unwearying devotion of the many bishops and priests who do battle for the Lord and labour to save souls. The Lord himself knows that I had no desire whatsoever to detract from their merits.
In order to illustrate more clearly the sorrows which now afflict the Church, I often compared modern conditions in the Church with those prevailing when faith and love burned more brightly amongst christians. This led some to conclude that I proposed a return to ancient church discipline as a universal remedy. This was never my intention. Modern discipline is as much the work of divine wisdom as the old, which cannot remain unchanged forever, but has to be adapted to circumstances by the Church under the continual assistance and suggestion of the Holy Spirit.
The aim of the book was simply to point to the agony of the Church. Remedies were touched upon only incidentally, and would require a separate study.
Parts of the book appear to be defective and could lead the reader to attribute to me opinions that I do not hold. For example, I note that historically speaking the demise of Latin contributed to divided attitudes at worship between people and clergy. Without disapproving explicitly the suggested use of modern languages in the sacred liturgy, I go on immediately to say that the clergy, given suitable instruction, could overcome the disadvantage imposed by a dead language. It has been rightly desired that I add an explicit disapproval of the opinion, censured by the Church, which favours adoption of the vernacular in the sacred liturgy.
I have accepted this and other observations in the present edition [which Rosmini left unpublished after his unhesitating submission to the condemnation of the work] and have corrected many uncriticised passages. Other places needing amendment have still to be indicated [this has been done in the critical edition, 1981].
It has been said that I wished to allow the people to choose their own bishops. Chapter 4 indicates how erroneous this belief is. My only desire is that when a bishop is chosen the people testify to the candidates freely and devoutly according to the spirit of the Church. Further clarification on this point can be gained from the three letters on the subject already written and published by me, and now added as an appendix to this edition.
Finally I beg forgiveness of my readers for defects remaining in my work and appeal to their charity for a favourable interpretation of what I have said. I have written to assist, not to hinder; to unite, not to divide; and I submit what I have written to the judgment of the Church in the spirit expressed in my introduction to the work.