Thursday, December 1, 2016

MORE PALACE INTRGUE; CARDINAL MUELLER IMPLCITLY SIDES WITH THE FOUR CARDINALS, OR DOES HE? COULD HE BE A 6TH CARDINAL?


Catholic World News

Cardinal Müller says CDF cannot answer cardinals’ dubia without Pope’s approval

December 01, 2016
The prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) has said that he will not respond to the dubia submitted by four cardinals about the interpretation of Amoris Laetitia, unless Pope Francis instructs him to do so.
Cardinal Gerhard Müller explained, in an interview with the Kathpress news service, that the CDF speaks for the Roman Pontiff, and issues judgments “with the authority of the Pope.” The office could respond to the four cardinals if Pope Francis authorized it, he said. But it would be inappropriate for the CDF to intervene in a controversy without the Pope’s approval, he said.

The four cardinals had submitted their dubia to the CDF. But their letter was addressed to the Pontiff.

Cardinal Müller said that reports about a battle inside the Vatican about the interpretation of the papal document were overblown, and reflected the tendency of reporters who see Church affairs in terms of power politics. At the same time, he said that it is important for the faithful to “remain objective and not be drawn into polarization.”

Regarding the most controversial question about Amoris Laetitia—the question of whether divorced and remarried Catholics could be admitted to Communion—Cardinal Müller did not answer directly. However, he referred to a 1993 directive from the CDF, in which then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger rejected a plan by German bishops to allow divorced couples to receive Communion in some cases.

Cardinal Müller said that Amoris Laetitia should be read in the light of previous papal documents, and that the permanence of the marriage bond should be the “unshakeable foundation” of every pastoral strategy. He said that Pope Francis was seeking to help couples “find a way that is in accordance with God’s gracious will.”

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

How disgusting! All these spineless bishops more concerned with pleasing a sociopath than with obeying Christ. The Christ who suffered and was crucified for them. Disgusting! The revulsion I have for these bishops is beyond words. Either adultery is a sin or it isn't! Either Christ told the truth or He lied. Spineless evil wicked men all of them. You will all get the reward you deserve. Souls are stake and you stand by silent while Francis is dismantling the Faith.

DJR said...

Ukrainian Catholic Deacon publicly states pope needs to answer dubia.

http://www.thechristianreview.com/pope-francis-answer-the-four-cardinals/


Karl Keating of Catholic answers agrees with cardinals who signed dubia.

You know things have racheted up a notch if Catholic Answers is now openly talking about this. Karl Keating is not exactly known for being a "rad trad." His ordinary has made the news recently. Perhaps that's why Mr. Keating has come out publicly on this. Good for him.

http://www.catholic.com/blog/karl-keating/sounds-of-silence

From the article:

Some orthodox Catholics, including at least one prominent apologist, say there was no reason for the cardinals’ action because the ambiguities in Amoris Laetitia already have been clarified sufficiently—not, admittedly, by the pope himself but by surrogates such as Cardinal Christoph Schönborn.

I disagree. The five questions submitted by the cardinals are framed precisely and narrowly, and I don’t think any of them has been answered cleanly by anyone in authority: not Schönborn, not Müller, and not the pope.

Not that answering them would be a burden on anyone. It doesn’t take half an hour to read Seeking Clarity slowly, and the five questions are phrased to elicit a Yes or No answer. I can see no good reason for no response having been forthcoming, and, so far as I know, no one has offered an explanation of why the pope has ignored the submission.

This doesn’t strike me as the best way for him to have ended the Year of Mercy.


Mark Thomas said...

I found Cardinal Müller's comments reassuring in that it's clear that we must proceed serenely in regard to the "controversy" at hand. Actually, the "controversy" is very limited in that even as right-winger bloggers have acknowledged, the overwhelming majority of Catholics side with His Holiness Pope Francis.

Michael Matt of The Remnant today acknowledged that the "vast majority" of Catholics would inform traditionalists, Cardinal Burke, Bishop Schneider..."to chill out...relax."

I have not encountered at the several parishes near me anybody who claims to have been scandalized by Amoris Laetitia. Where does this "controversy" exist? Where are the millions of Catholics who are up in arms in regard to Amoris Laetitia?

Michael Matt is correct. The "vast majority" of Catholics don't share the outrage that traditionalists share in regard to Pope Francis and Amoris Laetitia. The "controversy" is, for the most part, limited to the world of right-wingers.

Anyway, I don't believe that we're headed into schism. I am comforted by Cardinal Müller's comments in that I believe that peace will prevail, at least among our Cardinals and bishops, in regard to the "controversy" related to the Four Cardinals and dubia.

The right-wing hype in regard to the "war" that they believe will (or has just begun) engulf the Church is about as credible as their claim that George Soros controls Pope Francis

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Dialogue said...

Mark Thomas,

You seem, sincerely enough, to think Catholicism is lived out primarily on blogs. However, faithful pastoral leaders who work with couples are now faced with considerable theological confusion in real life. It has nothing to do with opposition to the pope, or with a need for serenity.

Pope Francis, who seems to have had very little concrete interaction with parochial clergy, has a view of clergymen that is hard to reconcile with the concrete reality. Parochial clergy "accompany" the faithful along various "paths" to holiness every day, and these clergy do not have the luxury of living in either the realm of pure theory or in abstract legalism. Such clergy simply and faithfully try to apply the Catholic truth to the lives of fallen human beings. But when one pope contradicts his predecessors and dismisses the pastoral work of millions of priests, those in authority around him need to step up and rectify the situation. The pope is a servant, not the savior.

Dialogue said...

Sorry, "thousands of priests". I got carried away.

Mark Thomas said...

Dialogue, how will those in authority around the Pope rectify the situation?

Thank you.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Dialogue said...

Mark Thomas,

Ask Cardinal Burke.

John Nolan said...

Mark Thomas

Back in April Professor Robert Spaemann stated bluntly that Amoris Laetitia cannot be reconciled with Church teaching. He is not a right-wing blogger; he is the most respected Catholic moral philosopher in Germany.

Forty-five theologians, philosophers and clergy signed a letter to the Dean of the Sacred College asking for clarification of certain controversial passages in the document. Some of them have blogs, but what unites them is their concern for orthodoxy and clarity of expression. Are we to assume that this is a purely right-wing concern?

The controversial Chapter 8 recycled two articles written ten years ago by a relatively obscure Argentine theologian, Victor Fernandez, which were critical of JP II's 'Veritatis Splendor'. It turns out that Fernandez was a Bergoglio protégé; Francis made him a bishop and uses him as a theological guru and ghostwriter. The Pope claimed not to be aware of a crucial footnote in AL, which suggests he didn't write it in the first place.

Fernandez has also crowed that Francis has an agenda to change the Church irreversibly, and that criticism of the Pope amounts to criticism of the Holy Ghost. You can be sure he didn't say the same about JP II and Benedict. Francis might be considering him as a potential CDF Prefect - a truly terrifying scenario.

How many 'millions of Catholics' have read AL, or even a summary of it, or any reactions to it? Few read the Catholic press or visit Catholic blogs. Yet they can tell cardinals and eminent theologians to 'chill out'. Really?

Anyone with half a brain can see the ambiguities in AL. If they are placed there deliberately then this is a scandal which transcends the Exhortation itself. The supreme Pontiff is there to confirm the brethren, not to sow confusion. This is not a trivial matter, and Francis needs to act quickly and decisively.

I don't foresee a formal schism; the Church is fragmented enough already. But it is difficult to escape the conclusion that we are approaching a crisis point - not just for the present papacy, but for the post-Conciliar Church as a whole. I hear the distant clucking of chickens coming home to roost.

Dialogue said...

John Nolan,

As a Vatican prefect, Fernandez's insights into the art of kissing could find a global audience, and inspire a new generation of comedians!

Mark Thomas said...

Dialogue, I asked you as you stated that "those in authority around him need to step up and rectify the situation."

I don't have any desire to ask Cardinal Burke. To begin, he isn't the man to ask. Only the Roman Pontiff can rectify the situation — should he determine that he needs to address the situation.

Therefore, without an answer to my question, I will move on. Thank you.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

John Nolan said..."How many 'millions of Catholics' have read AL, or even a summary of it, or any reactions to it? Few read the Catholic press or visit Catholic blogs. Yet they can tell cardinals and eminent theologians to 'chill out'. Really?"

Yes, they can. Catholics are called to submit to Pope Francis. Jesus Christ said that when you hear the Pope, you hear Jesus' voice. Pope Francis is the Supreme Shepherd of the Church. He has the God-given authority to teach, govern, and sanctify the Holy People of God.

Catholics are on solid ground to remain united to the Pope while, in turn, they suggest that those who teach contrary to the Pope to "chill out."

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

John Nolan said..."How many 'millions of Catholics' have read AL, or even a summary of it, or any reactions to it? Few read the Catholic press or visit Catholic blogs. Yet they can tell cardinals and eminent theologians to 'chill out'. Really?"

When Amoris Laetitia was released to the Church and world, there were "eminent theologians" who claimed that the Exhortation had changed Church teaching.

Cardinal Burke, in turn, declared that Amoris Laetitia was orthodox. He denounced those, which included "eminent theologians," who insisted that Amoris Laetitia
had changed Church teaching.

Cardinal Burke refused to heed "eminent theologians" who disagreed with his positive assessment of Amoris Laetitia.

The Faithful have every right to dismiss "eminent theologians" opposed to Amoris Laetitia in the same manner as the theologians in question were dismissed by Cardinal Burke.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

John Nolan said...

Mark Thomas

Who are 'those who teach contrary to the Pope?' Surely the problem is that no-one is really sure what the Pope is teaching, hence the dubia.

When AL first came out, there was widespread relief that it did not attempt to change doctrine, and the default position of senior prelates like Cardinal Burke is to defend the Pope. Spaemann is not in that position, and can be more objective. Regarding article 305 and footnote 351, and referencing Familiaris Consortio and Veritatis Splendor, his conclusions are difficult to refute.

Burke made his comments starting with the premise that AL is non-magisterial. He does not 'dismiss' any 'eminent theologians' - indeed his reaction to AL predates the Spaemann interview by two weeks. And if he had no doubts about the unimpeachable orthodoxy of AL, why is he now asking for clarification?

'Jesus Christ said that when you hear the Pope you hear Jesus' voice.' He said no such thing, and this is ultramontanism on steroids. I wonder for how long your naïf hyperpapalism will survive in the current climate.

Mark Thomas said...

John Nolan said..."Anyone with half a brain can see the ambiguities in AL. If they are placed there deliberately then this is a scandal which transcends the Exhortation itself. The supreme Pontiff is there to confirm the brethren, not to sow confusion. This is not a trivial matter, and Francis needs to act quickly and decisively."

Who has been scandalized by Amoris Laetitia?

Mister Nolan, as you noted..."How many 'millions of Catholics' have read AL, or even a summary of it, or any reactions to it? Few read the Catholic press or visit Catholic blogs."

As even Michael Matt of The Remnant acknowledged, the "vast majority" of Catholics couldn't care less about the "controversy" that has surrounded Amoris Laetitia. The most vocal conservative Catholic bloggers who attack His Holiness Pope Francis and Amoris Laetitia daily have acknowledged that reality.

Pope Francis/Amoris Laetitia has, of course, speaking relatively, scandalized a few Catholics. That is undeniable. It is also undeniable that Catholics have the right to discuss (respectfully) Amoris Laetitia. That is good and healthy for Holy Mother Church.

But each Pope...each document...will "scandalize" somebody. Vatican II has scandalized "X" amount of Catholics. Summorum Pontificum scandalized "X" amount of Catholics who fear that the liturgical clock has been turned back to the 1950s.

Pope Francis' promotion of Indulgences has "scandalized" "X" amount of "modern" Catholics.

A Pope must comfort his spiritual children. The cries of even one child deserve attention. I understand that. But in fairness to Pope Francis, he said that he's responded to said cries. Pope Francis has responded to the "controversy" in regard to Amoris Laetitia.

The problem is that Pope Francis' critics have refused to accept his response. Pope Francis's critics won't rest until Pope Francis declares himself and Amoris Laetitia "heretical" and resigns as Pope.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

John Nolan said..."Jesus Christ said that when you hear the Pope you hear Jesus' voice.' He said no such thing..."

Really? Then you and I adhere to two very different religions. The religion to which I adhere, the Catholic Religion, has taught always and everywhere that he who hears the Pope hears Jesus Christ.

Therefore, Mister Nolan, as you preach a Gospel that differs from the Catholic Gospel, I am compelled by the Catholic Church to reject your declaration in question.

Lumen Gentium:

"And just as the office granted individually to Peter, the first among the apostles, is permanent and is to be transmitted to his successors, so also the apostles' office of nurturing the Church is permanent, and is to be exercised without interruption by the sacred order of bishops.

"Therefore, the Sacred Council teaches that bishops by divine institution have succeeded to the place of the apostles, as shepherds of the Church,

========================================================================

******* and he who hears them, hears Christ, and he who rejects them, rejects Christ and Him who sent Christ." *******

=========================================================================

"This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will."

Pax.

Mark Thomas

"In the Apostolic See the Catholic Religion has always been preserved Immaculate."

— The Faith of the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, from the Creed of Pope Saint Hormisdas (529 A.D.)

Adam Michael said...

"Who has been scandalized by Amoris Laetitia?"

Those who value unity of ecclesiastical discipline among all the bishops of the Church have been scandalized by the varied interpretations of Amoris Laetitia.

"A Pope must comfort his spiritual children. The cries of even one child deserve attention. I understand that. But in fairness to Pope Francis, he said that he's responded to said cries. Pope Francis has responded to the "controversy" in regard to Amoris Laetitia."

Is this papal emotional positivism? "The Pope says that he responded to you, so he has." For you to view the spiritual fatherhood of the Roman Pontiff in this manner bespeaks a very distorted view of spiritual (and maybe natural) fatherhood. This worries me and I will pray for you.

"The problem is that Pope Francis' critics have refused to accept his response. Pope Francis's critics won't rest until Pope Francis declares himself and Amoris Laetitia 'heretical' and resigns as Pope."

Not quite, Mister Thomas. Don't seclude yourself in a bubble - it is unbecoming of men.






Anonymous said...

If the pope corrects liberals they deserve it. If the pope corrects conservatives he's modernist heretic. Seems like people are only willing to submit to a Magisterium that agrees with them, not that which contradicts what they hold as most dear.

Rad-trads think that Vatican II contradicted non-negotiables. But Vatican II is magisterial. Well the Magisterium was just wrong. Should the pope and bishops teach something officially that contradicts their understanding will conservatives join the rad-trads?

Does anyone still believe that the Church is indefectible or that private judgements can be wrong, but Magisterial teachings never?

John Nolan said...

Mark Thomas

'Jesus Christ said ...' Chapter and verse, please.

You do talk the most sublime nonsense.

DJR said...

Sviatoslav Shevchuk, Major Archbishop of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, is alleged to be one of the six signers of the dubia submitted to the pope.

In speaking with people at the parish yesterday, I learned that the archbishop is taking some initiatives for expansion of the UGCC. He is 46.

The archbishop apparently is allowing some of his priests to cross over into our parishes as well, as we have an acute shortage of priests. I know the priest presently in Albuquerque is Ukrainian.

The archbishop is devout and totally Catholic and will have the entire Ukrainian Rite Church behind him.

God grant him many blessed years!

The pope must respond to the dubia.

Mark Thomas said...

John Nolan said..."You do talk the most sublime nonsense."

Mister Nolan, I recognize that I'm a sinful, lowly, ignorant man — a true hack. However, Holy Mother Church is neither ignorant nor a hack.

The Holy Catholic Church has taught always and everywhere that he who hears the Pope hears Jesus Christ. I am sorry that you have placed yourself above God and His Holy Church in that you have refused to accept said teaching.

Mister Nolan, Jesus Christ calls upon us to humble ourselves in the fashion of child. I need to humble myself in a million ways. Mister Nolan, perhaps you need to humble yourself so as to accept the Church's teaching that he who hears the Pope hears, in turn, Jesus Christ.

But please pray for me as I'm certain that I require more prayers and humility than you.

Let each of us recall that where Peter is, there is the Catholic Church.

May you and your family experience a blessed Advent Season.

Thank you.

Pax.

Mark Thomas


"And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.

"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

DJR said...

Mark Thomas said... The Holy Catholic Church has taught always and everywhere that he who hears the Pope hears Jesus Christ.

This unqualified statement ignores the history of the Catholic Church and the history of the papacy.

When His Holiness Pope John XXII openly proclaimed heresy, were the Catholics at the time "hearing" Jesus Christ?

When the Holy Father Pope Stephen VI dug up the cadaver of the previous Vicar of Christ Pope Formosus, had the body put on trial and then thrown in the river, afterwards declaring Pope Formosus to be an antipope and annulled all his ordinations/consecrations, were the Catholics at the time "hearing" Jesus Christ?

I repeat, were the Catholics at the time "hearing" Jesus Christ when Pope Stephen VI declared Pope Formosus to be an antipope?

If so, were they "hearing" Jesus Christ when two of Pope Stephen's successors contradicted Stephen and reinstated Pope Formosus?

If they were "hearing" Jesus Christ in those two (Theodore II and John IX), were they "hearing" Jesus Christ when Sergius III contradicted them and declared that Pope Stephen VI was correct and that Pope Formosus was an antipope?

These are historical facts, and examples could be multiplied.

If your understanding of Catholicism were correct, which it is not, Jesus Christ contradicts Himself.

John Nolan said...

Mark Thomas

I asked you to provide the Scriptural reference for your statement 'Jesus Christ said that when you hear the Pope you hear Jesus' voice'. I accept the Catholic interpretation of Matthew 16:18, but your bald statement is a reductio ad absurdum. A pope is allowed to have views and opinions, and to express them, but to suggest that every time he opens his mouth he is acting as an oracle of God verges on blasphemy.

Benedict XVI, who weighed his words carefully, would be the first to ridicule such a notion; and so would Francis, who tends to think aloud in an extempore and not always consistent manner.

By the way, there's no need to sound like Uriah Heep. True humility should tell you that when you're in a hole, stop digging!