Speaking with National Catholic Register, Cardinal Gerhard Müller suggested that Francis appoint a group of cardinals to engage in a “theological disputation” with critics of Amoris Laetitia; in particular, “some prominent representatives” of the dubia, as well as the Filial Correction.
Müller, according to Edward Pentin, described the theological disputation as “a formalized method of debate designed to uncover and establish truths in theology.”
In the present case, it would be specifically about “the different and sometimes controversial interpretations of some statements in Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia.”
Here we go again… the “interpretation” card.
If anyone needed to be reminded why the removal of Cardinal Müller from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was no great loss, here it is.
Müller speaks as if Amoris Laetitia concerns theological truths about which the Church has yet to definitively pronounce. Perhaps he never heard of the Council of Trent.
In this, he is simply being true his core convictions.
Müller is a man-of-the-Council – the same that disregarded the bi-millennial witness of traditional in order to create a “New Pentecost;” even going so far as to misappropriate Sacred Scripture in an attempt to fashion a counterfeit church in the image and likeness of man.
It is Jesus Christ who “makes all things new again,” but for modernists like Gerhard Müller, it’s the purview of mere men in every age to debate anew doctrinal disputes that have long since been settled.
Indeed, that is precisely the purpose for which the Synod of Bishops was established by Pope Paul the Pathetic in the first place.
According to his Apostolic Letter, Apostolica Sollicitudo, the Synod of Bishops has as one of its purposes:
To facilitate agreement, at least on essential matters of doctrine and on the course of action to be taken in the life of the Church.
As Paul VI wrote in 1965, there were exactly ZERO “essential matters of doctrine” upon which serious theological disagreement existed; not among authentic Catholics at any rate.
As for Cardinal Müller’s suggestion that comprehension of the present situation is somehow beyond the pay grade of anyone who is neither a cardinal nor otherwise “prominent,” it is to laugh.
The fact of the matter is that any moderately intelligent Catholic with an interest in what the Church actually teaches, a lap top, and an internet connection is perfectly capable of identifying the heresies and blasphemies present in the text of Amoris Laetitia.
Want proof?
Reread my post of April 9, 2016 – one day after that dreadful document was published:
Council of Trent declares: “Let Francis be anathema!”
The main difference between what you will find there and the Filial Correction is that the condemnation of Amoris Laetitia posted in this space came nearly a year-and-a-half earlier.
To be very clear, this is no credit to me, but rather is it a discredit to handwringing conciliarists who have not the Catholic faith, as well as to those who posture as defenders of tradition but dared not say the “H” word aloud until very recently if at all.
According to Edward Pentin’s report, Cardinal Müller went on to suggest:
The Church needs “more dialogue and reciprocal confidence” rather than “polarization and polemics”…
Yes, quoting Sacred Scripture, the Council of Trent, and previous papal Magisterium reaffirming the same in the face of heresy and blasphemy is just so… polarizing and polemical.
These are the kinds of men we are counting on to confront Francis in the form of a “formal declaration.”
I point this out, not to belittle Cardinals Burke and Brandmuller, both of whom are also men-of-the-Council, but simply to reiterate a point made in yesterday’s post.
Truly, it is nothing short of a miracle that the Dubia was ever written, and even more so that the promised declaration appears to be in the offing.
As the Filial Correction seems to suggest, God’s grace is having an effect on those who were previously blind or perhaps too fearful to make their voices heard.
Let us resolve at this critical hour to redouble our prayers and sacrifices for Holy Church, confident that Our Lord is pleased to respond.
I thought the Deposit of Faith given by Our Lord to His Apostles was all the theology we needed. Silly me!
Is ++Müller positioning himself to be the next Pope??
Creepy reflection in those shades!
The bottom line is this: Mueller can either get on board with the Dubia and sign on to the formal correction when it finally comes or simply resign. One way or the other, every single cardinal, bishop, priest, deacon, and laymen alike will have to make a decision: to follow Jesus, His Apostles, and Church teaching no Faith and Morals, or risk eternal damnation. The choice is crystal clear. There is no gray area on this one.
The Same choice was faced by the Church after V2 and introduction of NO. Don’t expect any heroes from the heretical V2 NO sect. Their track record is one of slow capitulation to the forces of modernism.
What else to expect from the has-been Müller, who apparently doesn’t believe the Resurrection of Christ is an actual physical event that could’ve been recorded on camera, but really something that occurred in the hearts of His disciples?
“A running camera would not have been able to make an audio-visual recording of either the Easter manifestations of Jesus in front of his disciples, nor of the Resurrection event, which, at its core, is the consummation of the personal relation of the Father to the incarnate Son in the Holy Ghost. In contrast to human reason, animals and technical devices are not capable of a transcendental experience and thus also lack the ability to be addressed by the Word of God through perceptible phenomena and signs. Only human reason in its inner unity of categoricality [sic] and transcendentality [sic] is determinable by the Spirit of God to enable it to perceive in the sensory cognitive image (triggered by the manifestation event) the person-reality of Jesus as the cause of this sensory-mental cognitive image.”
(Gerhard L. Müller, Katholische Dogmatik, 8th ed. [Freiburg: Herder, 2010], p. 300; our translation; see scanned image here.)
One wonders what Müller thinks of the Roman Soldiers who witnessed it? Did the big stone that rolled away too have a transcendental experience?
Put him on trial too after Francis. Does the Vatican still have that guillotine around?
Yes, Anna, he is doing exactly that.
So Lazarus failed to appear & the crowds at the gates of the City of Naim were all decieved Mueller? Now Mueller is trying to decieve the rest of us. Too stupid for words. How did he graduate the minor seminary? Lost his faith and still trying to get others to loose theirs. God have mercy on his soul.
+Fellay explains why he signed the “Correction”:
https://gloria.tv/article/X17AhSjP1FGg1Rmxyt9iA9KAn
Fellay sounds more like a cociliarist than the conciliarists .
That’s not the half of it Jonno.
Mueller also expressly denies the dogma of Transubstantiation, just like (Joseph Ratzinger).
“In reality, body and blood of Christ does not signify the physical parts of the man Jesus during his life or in his glorified body. Body and blood here signifies specifically the presence of Christ in the symbolism of bread and wine. …
“We now have communion with Jesus Christ, through the eating and drinking of the bread and wine. Just as in an interpersonal relationship, a letter can show the friendship between persons and illustrate the affection of the sender for the recipient.” …
“The nature of these gifts can be clarified only in their relation to man. The essence of the bread and the wine, therefore, must be defined in an anthropological way. …
The natural character of these offerings [the bread and wine] as a fruit of the earth and the work of human hands, as units of natural and cultural products, is to strengthen and nourish man and the human community in the character of a common meal. … This natural essence of the bread and wine is transformed by God in the sense that this nature of bread and wine now shows and achieves salvific communion with God.”
(G. L. Müller, Die Messe, Quelle Christlichen Lebens. Augsburg: Sankt Ulrich Verlag, 2002, pp. 139-140)
That’s Gerhard Mueller, the “watchdog of Orthodoxy. Wasn’t he at the Tenth anniversary celebration of Summorum Pontificum (which is where the Novus Ordo was first referred to as the “Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite”) in Rome recently?
See? Give some people the Latin Mass, and they’ll throw out the rest of the Faith. That seems to have been the plan all along…