Skip to main content

Cardinal Mueller Shows His Mettle: "No Danger to the Faith"- SSPX Article

+
JMJ

Well Cardinal Mueller is the toast of the blogosphere right now.

OnePeterFive has this article trying to make some sense in this about-face by the head of the CDF.

In addition the SSPX has put forth the following article.

Years ago, when Mueller first became the head of the CDF, someone wondered if it was a case of the fox guarding the hen house or a poacher makes the best game warden.

Perhaps it is a little a clearer now ...







Cardinal Müller's confusing comment about the four Cardinals' dubia: "Amoris Laetitia is very clear in its doctrine."
Cardinal Gerhard Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, was interviewed on the Italian channel Tgcom24 on Sunday January 8, 2017. In the interview he said that a “fraternal correction” of Pope Francis regarding his apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia is “not possible at this time because it is not a danger to the faith as St. Thomas [Aquinas] said.”
He was referring to the dubia of the four cardinals Carlo Caffarra, Walter Brandmüller, Raymond Burke, and Joachim Meisner, who asked the Pope to clarify the “grave disorientation and great confusion” due to different readings of the teachings contained in Amoris Laetitia.
So far the Holy Father has not responded to the questions and has made it known to Cardinal Müller that he is not to respond to them on his behalf. Cardinal Müller:

Pope Francis asks to discern the situation of these people who live in irregular unions, that are not according to the Church's teaching on marriage, and to help these people find a way for a new integration into the Church according to the conditions of the sacraments, the Christian message about marriage.”
The Cardinal does not “see any opposition: on the one hand we have the clear teaching on marriage, on the other the obligation of the Church to be concerned about these people in difficulty.”
For Cardinal Müller, Amoris Laetitia is “very clear in its doctrine and we can interpret the whole doctrine of Jesus on marriage, the whole doctrine of the Church in 2,000 years of history."

Bewilderment in Rome


Edward Pentin reported that "the cardinal’s comments have been met with bewilderment in Rome, with some arguing that the cardinal has missed the point: the question, they say, is not whether Amoris Laetitia can be read in continuity with tradition but whether it is ambiguous enough that it can be read in a heterodox way.”
The Cardinal’s statements during this interview are odd considering his previous statements on the marriage and family. He was very clear last year in Oviedo, Spain affirming that Amoris Laetitia does not open the door to Holy Communion for civilly remarried divorcees, reaffirming Art. 84 of Pope St. John Paul’s apostolic exhortation Familiaris Consortio which states that remarried divorcees cannot be admitted to Eucharistic Communion unless they are able to live in “complete continence.”

Not Seeing Confusion is Confusing


How can the Cardinal ignore the contradictory interpretations of AmorisLaetitia expressed by bishops and episcopal conferences of Germany, Argentina, and Poland, along with the concerns raised by so many prelates and the famous letter of the 45 theologians which point out errors and ambiguities about faith and morals in the exhortation?
And if we can rely on the information of Jean-Marie Guenois in Le Figaro (April 7), what about the 20-page document of corrections of Amoris Laetitia written by his own Congregation?
The same journalist also reported about a letter that 30 cardinals, having seen in advance a draft of the apostolic exhortation, wrote to the Pope expressing their reservations, especially on the issue of communion for remarried divorcees. The letter warned that Amoris Laetitia would weaken the three essential sacraments of the Church: the Eucharist, marriage, and confession. 

What Happened to Cardinal Müller?
 

Edward Pentin comments that critics say the Cardinal seems oblivious to the concerns about the divergent interpretations of the document and suspect that after the Pope recently removed three of the cardinal's collaborators, and with Cardinal Burke’s possible formal correction, he felt compelled, or was compelled, to show the Pope an unmistakable sign of loyalty. Others argue that the Italian the cardinal uses in the interview is more nuanced than the English translation, that he knows what he is doing, and is trying to defend orthodoxy and Church unity in his own way.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

Church Militant TV and the SSPX - Again

+ JMJ The old narrative used to be that the SSPX was 'schismatic' and 'excommunicated'. Now the excommunication has been lifted for a number of years and the only ones who think it still has effect are the 'resistors'. That leaves the other opponents of the SSPX with the label 'schismatic'. Make it clear, the conservative Catholics have issues with the SSPX probably because they violate some of their assumptions about the Faith and this crisis of the Church. Church Militant TV is one of these the exists along the Catholic thought spectrum. They like the Traditional Mass but must ensure that they don't get tarred with the same 'schismatic' brush that the liberals use against the SSPX.  So what do they do, they use the same brush against the SSPX. The funny thing is that even when the Church does speak, they don't want to listen and persist in calling the SSPX 'schismatic'. Here's a transcript of the latest s...

The Curious Case of Steve Skojec and the Dangers of Deep Diving into the Crisis Sub-Titled: The Failings of Others

 + JMJ It's been a while now since Steve Skojec sold 1P5 and abandoned the Catholic Faith. I've been a 'Trad' since 1982 and in those 40+ years I seen this death-spiral before with a similar end point. It seems that anyone who jumps into the fray unprepared for the enormous task of righting wrongs will, eventually, become discouraged by not the task but the people who surround them.   I remember when Skojec complained of the treatment his family received from a traditional priest.  This seems to have been the start of the end for him. So what can we learn from the likes of Steve Skojec, Michael Voris (maybe?), Louie Verrecchio, Gerry Matatix and other celebrity Catholics? Probably quite a lot about what not to do. First, don't burn out on the crisis?  When you burn out, on work or anything else, little things assume a more greater importance than they are due.   This is one of my 'canary in the coal mine' signals that I've been stretching myself too th...

The Position of the SSPX on Canonizations by the Saint Factory

+ JMJ I have sometimes been criticized for including 'St' as a title for Pope John Paul II et al. I've given my reasons here  in a discussion with Alex Long. The question is one of prudence in discussions with ntCatholics and in some cases with tCatholics. In discussions with:  ntCatholics, I will use the title in order to continue the discussion and help them arrive at a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. tCatholics, I will use the title in order to broaden their perspective on the doctrine of dogmatic facts. This broader perspective is, in my opinion, essential maintaining a realistic understanding of the crisis of the Church. So from a doctrinal position, I have written the article Dogmatic Fact of Fancy  and includes a reference on canonizations. Now, I know the position of the SSPX is that the canonizations are doubtful (see references below) and I also know of at least one non-SSPX theologian who agrees with the level of doubt du...