Wednesday, March 11, 2015

Important: "Cardinal Müller: foundations for a return to the Magisterium - and the limits of Papal power"

Don Pio Pace, "Cardinal Müller: foundations for a return to the Magisterium - and the limits of Papal power" (Rorate Caeli, March 11, 2015):
God only allows evil so as greater good may be accomplished. The immense disorder of the assemblies of the Synod on the Family prompts beautiful professions of faith by high-placed prelates of the Church, who are signs of hope for the future of the Church.

The extreme-progressive French magazine Golias moreover notes with disquiet the "danger" that men such as Cañizares, Burke, Müller, Ranjith, Ouellet, Sarah, and other "young" Cardinals (around 65 years old) represent to their viewpoint, that is, in the perspective of a further liberalization of the Church's constitution, adding to them some over seventy-year-olds, such as Scola, Caffarra, Pell, among others.

Gerhard Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, one of the Cardinals who took part in the authorship of the book "Remaining in the Truth of Christ", along with his brothers Brandmüller, Burke, Caffara and De Paolis, has, for example, just made public a conference that he presented on the past January 13, in Esztergom, Hungary, on the "Theological nature of the Doctrinal Commissions [of the Episcopal Conferences] and the role of Bishops as Doctors of the Faith".

In a very Ratzingerian way (reference is made to the motu proprio Apostolos Suos of John Paul II), he puts each thing in its place: one thing is the supplementary power of the Conferences of Bishops and their organs, such as Doctrinal Commissions, charged with the harmonization of pastoral orientations; one very different thing is the power of Divine Right of the Successors of the Apostles, Doctors of the Faith and guardians of their Particular Churches, at the same time in which they take part at the solicitude for the whole Church, in communion with the Supreme Shepherd.

The following passage, concerning the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiff, was particularly noticed in Rome:
In his 1998 "Considerations" on the primacy of the Successor of Peter, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith affirms that the primacy of the Successor of Peter is — as all the faithful — submitted to the Word of God, to the Catholic Faith, and is the guarantor of the obedience of the Church and is, in this sense, servus servorum. He [the Pope] does not decide according to his own will [arbitrio], but voiced the will of the Lord, who speaks to man in Scripture as lived and interpreted by Tradition; in other words, the episkopè of the Primacy has limits that proceed from Divine Law and the inviolable Divine Constitution of the Church contained in Revelation. The Successor of Peter is the rock that, against arbitrariness and conformism, guarantees rigorous faithfulness to the Word of God.
At the same time, Cardinal Robert Sarah, new Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, plays from a similar score in his interview book that has come out in France in the past few days, Either God or Nothing, Dieu ou rien (Fayard). The work has the subtitle "Conversation on the Faith", which is by itself a whole program... The organization of the Cardinal's words on the liturgy, done under the care of a writer called Nicolas Diat, is absolutely remarkable: Robert Sarah presents a very detailed and very moving account of his life, displays his (solid) theology and his high spiritual aspirations for the priesthood and for the pastors of the Church. The tone of the African bishop, who risked his own life more than once, reaches a solemn level when he speaks of the relativistic Western ideology upon which some wish to sacrifice the message of Christ, especially concerning marriage and family. All of it, according to current usage, sprinkled with beautiful quotes by Pope Francis.

On February 8, also Cardinal Müller had published an article in L'Osservatore Romano entitled "Cleansing the Temple" (on the Vatican website: "Theological Criteria for a Reform of the Church and of the Roman Curia"). In it, he shows that the traditional reforms of the Church are spiritual, and not political. The reform of the Curia must be exemplary in this regard: its organizational structure and its functioning must be understood submitted to the specific mission of the Successor of Peter, "the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of unity" (Lumen Gentium, 23). The Curia is not, "an intermediate level between Pope and bishops," but it is intimately linked to his mission of universal pastoral government of flocks and lambs. Based on this, the Cardinal dismisses as something opposed to its essence the integration into the Curia of the Synod of Bishops: "The Synod of Bishops, the Conferences of Bishops, and the various aggregations of particular Churches belong to a different theological category of that of the Roman Curia." Which is a head-on criticism of the idea, made up within the cardinalatial Commission in charge of propositions to reform the Curia, that considers the integration into the traditional dicasteries of a sort of permanent delegation of the Synod of Bishops.

In definitive words, Cardinals Müller and Sarah express their distinctness from, let us say, the Baldisseris, the Marxes, the Tagles, the Kaspers...


Catholic Mission said...

March 17, 2015

Edward Pentin pulls down Cardinal Muller's controversial interview ? : still available on the Vatican website 13 September 2012

On January 13, 2015 on the blog Eucharist and Mission I posted a report Cardinal Muller's doctrinal error placed on the Vatican website!.1 That report has not been removed from the Vatican website. It has been removed from Edward Penin's website or I am unable to find it if it is still there. The full text of the interview of Cardinal Muller by Edward Pentin though can also be read on the National Catholic Register and on this blog.
Here is the part where he made the common error on extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

Edward Pentin:
But do you feel there’s been a weakening of the Church’s teaching because of this underlying confusion of terminology. One example sometimes cited is that the teaching of “no salvation outside the Church” seems to have become less prominent. Can that be attributed to the Council in your view?

Cardinal Gerhard Muller:
That has been discussed, but here too there has been a development of all that was said in the Church, beginning with St. Cyprian, one of the Fathers of the Church, in the 3rd century. Again, the perspective is different between then and now. In the 3rd century, some Christian groups wanted to be outside the Church, and what St. Cyprian said is that without the Church, a Christian cannot be saved. The Second Vatican Council also said this: Lumen Gentium 14 says: “Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.” He who is aware of the presence of revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly and, not only in his conscience, in his heart, to this Catholic Church by remaining in communion with the Pope and those bishops in communion with him. But we cannot say that those who are inculpably ignorant of this truth are necessarily condemned for that reason. We must hope that those who do not belong to the Church through no fault of their own, but who follow the dictates of their God-given conscience, will be saved by Jesus Christ whom they do not yet know. Every person has the right to act according to his or her own conscience...-National Catholic Register

Keep in mind that exceptions to the dogma must exist in the present times. Something or someone can only be an exception today. Every exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation has to happen today.Otherwise it will not be an exception.

Something that happened in the past cannot be an exception to the dogma on March 17.

Something that will happen in the future cannot be an exception to the dogma on outside the church there is no salvation.

Something that happens in Heaven and is known only to God, cannot be an exception on earth to the dogma today;someone in Heaven cannot be an exception to all needing to convert formally into the Church on March 2017.

The message of the dogma is related to today.All need 'faith and baptism' for salvation today.All need to convert today into the Church to avoid the fires of Hell.

Even if someone were to die without faith and baptism ( which is not de fide) we would not know of it today. He would not be an exception to the dogma today.

So if a pope, cardinal or magisterial document infers that there are exceptions today it is false.It has to be rejected.This is common sense.The dead -past, present or future- cannot be exceptions to all needing to convert into the Church today.

there has been a development-Cardinal Muller.
How can there be a development when we do not know of any one saved outside the Church in the present times ? Who was the exception? Cardinal Muller cannot personally know of any exception.


Catholic Mission said...

Again, the perspective is different between then and now.

How can the perspective change ? There cannot be any known exception.

Cardinals Marchetti and Cushing in 1949 did not know of any exceptions.

At Vatican Council II ( 1960-1965) no one there knew of anyone saved without faith and baptism.

So where is the New Revelation? How could the dogma be different now?

He who is aware of the presence of revelation is obliged by his conscience to belong publicly...-Cardinal Muller.
Yes he is obliged but is Cardinal Muller inferring that this case is an exception to the strict interpretation of the dogma. Only those 'who are aware' are obliged to enter the Church and not 'all' people in general ? I think he is implying this! This was the original mistake of cardinals Marchetti and Cushing in 1949.

They assumed that persons saved with the baptism of desire and in invincible ignorance were:-

1) Saved without the baptism of water.

2) They are known to us in the present times ( 1949 for them and 2015 for us)

3) They are now saved and in Heaven but are visible to us on earth to be explicit exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma.

So every one does not need to enter the Church as the dogma taught but only those who 'know' .Since there were persons in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire who were saved and they are known to us on earth.

But we cannot say that those who are inculpably ignorant of this truth are necessarily condemned for that reason-Cardinal Muller

The dogma says all need to convert for salvation. All who have Original Sin need to be baptised with water in the Catholic Church. Vatican Council II (AG 7) also says 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation.The Catechism of the Catholic Church 1257 says the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water.

Cardinal Muller infers here that those who are in invincibll ignorance and will be saved or are saved, are known to us.Since they are known to us they become exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It is implied that they are saved without the baptism of water. They are in Heaven and are objectively visible to us.

How can they be known to us for them to be exceptions to the dogma today March 17, feast of St.Patrick?

Yet he implies this. Otherwise how can these cases in invincible ignorance be exceptions.

This is a common mistake of the Magisterium.

When Redemptoris Missio and Dominus Iesus were issued neither did Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger know of any exceptions to the dogma.

There is no known case of salvation outside the Church i.e without the Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.

Yet the Catechism of Pope John Paul II, Dominus Iesus, Redemptoris Missio and other magisterial documents, over seen by Cardinal Ratzinger, imply that there is salvation outside the Church.

Cardinal Muller has made a factual error. He infers that there are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma. In other words there are known cases of persons now in Heaven saved without the baptism of water, who are personally known to us on earth.

It is a fact of life that those saved are in Heaven and are not personally known or visible to us on earth. So how can there be exceptions to the dogma for us humans on March 17?-Lionel Andrades


Catholic Mission said...



January 13, 2015
Cardinal Muller's doctrinal error placed on the Vatican website!

January 16, 2015
Edward Pentin is asking us to accept a lie and proclaim a falsehood: the same error is being forced on the Franciscans of the Immaculate and the Manelli family

January 16, 2015
Catholics threatened by their bishop or the Vatican

January 15, 2015
EWTN's website like the NCR editorial policy assumes the dead in Heaven are living and visible exceptions to the interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney

January 15, 2015
Dan Burke,Jeanette DeMelo' s NCR Editorial policy promotes a lie

This is the magisterium?