Author Topic: The custodian of faith on the heretical interpretations of the Council (Read 1754 times)

Maria Auxiliadora · « **on:** November 29, 2012, 02:38:13 PM »

11/29/2012
The custodian of faith on the “heretical interpretations” of the Council
Gerhard Ludwig Müller

According to Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, traditionalists show a lack of orthodoxy when they point to the Second Vatican Council as the winter of the Catholic Church
Gianni Valente
Rome

Those who consider the Second Vatican Council, or Vatican II, to be a break from Church Tradition, offer a “heretical interpretation” of this great ecclesiastical event. And this doctrinal error is not made only by modernist innovators: it is also committed by neo-traditionalists who believe that Vatican II supposedly turned its back on the “traditional Church”. The suggestion that the traditionalist position may have “heretical” elements was made yesterday evening by Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, current Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. His remarks came during the presentation of volume VII of the German edition of Joseph Ratzinger’s “Opera Omnia”, a systematic collection of all the works which the theologian-turned-Pope dedicated to the Council and the docuмents that came out of it. The presentation took place in a very evocative place: the Teutonic College of Santa Maria dell'Anima which was expert-theologian Joseph Ratzinger’s logistical base during the Council sessions.

During his presentation, the head of the doctrinal dicastery, clearly stated that the only orthodox interpretation of the Second Vatican Council is that which sees it as an opportunity for reform and renewal, in continuity with the one subject-Church which the Lord has given us. Müller sees this as the only hermeneutics that respects “the indissoluble unity between the Holy Scriptures, the complete and integral Tradition and the Magisterium, which finds its highest expression in the Council, presided over by St. Peter’s Successor, as visible head of the Church.”

Archbishop Müller contrasted this “singular orthodox interpretation” with a “heretical interpretation” which he identified with “the hermeneutics of a split, both on the progressivist front and the traditionalist front.” According to Müller, what they both share in common is a rejection of the Council: “progressivists want to leave it behind them, as if it were just a phase that should be abandoned in order to move towards a different Church; traditionalists do not want to move towards such a Church, as if it represented the winter of the Catholica.”

In his speech, the former bishop of Regensburg described the contribution of Joseph Ratzinger, first as a theologian during the actual Council meetings (as a theological advisor to Cardinal Joseph Frings also) and then during the long and turbulent reception phase of the conciliar teachings. “It was a time of great expectation. Something big had to happen,” Benedict XVI wrote in the preface to the German volume presented by Müller.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #1 on:** November 29, 2012, 02:45:43 PM »

Link to the above article: http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/concilio-20155/

Telesphorus · « **Reply #2 on:** November 29, 2012, 02:50:32 PM »

The only heretics in the world according to this devil are the people who are actually Catholics.

The shamelessness and cheek of these filthy judaizers are breathtaking.

bowler · « **Reply #3 on:** November 29, 2012, 02:56:42 PM »

Not even Mueller himself believes what he says.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #4 on:** November 29, 2012, 02:59:10 PM »

http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_031_RatzingerCouterSyllabus.htm

Quote

Card. Ratzinger:
Gaudium et Spes is a "counter-Syllabus"

If one is looking for a global diagnosis of the text [of Gaudium et spes], one could say that it (along with the texts on religious liberty and world religions) is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of counter-Syllabus ....

Undoubtedly, many things have changed since then. The new ecclesiastical policy of Pius XI established a certain openness toward the liberal conception of the State. In a silent but persevering combat, Exegesis and Church History increasingly adopted the postulates of liberal science; on the other hand, in face of the great political upheavals of the 20th century, Liberalism was obliged to accept notable corrections.

This happened because, first in central Europe, conditioned by the situation, the unilateral dependence on the positions taken by the Church through the initiatives of Pius IX and Pius X against the new period of History opened by the French Revolution was to a large extent corrected via facti. But a fundamental new docuмent regarding relations with the world as it had been since 1789 was still lacking.

In reality, the mentality that preceded the revolution still reigned in the countries with strong Catholic majorities; today almost no one denies that the Spanish and Italian concordats [accords between Church and State] tried to conserve too many things from a conception of the world that for a long time had not corresponded to reality. Likewise, almost no one can deny that this dependence on an obsolete conception of relations between the Church and State was matched by similar anachronisms in the domain of education and the attitude taken toward the modern historical-critical method .... (that is to say - their denial of the historical veracity of the Gospels, their denial of Christ - Tele)

Let us content ourselves here with stating that the text [of Gaudium et spes] plays the role of a counter-Syllabus to the measure that it represents an attempt to officially reconcile the Church with the world as it had become after 1789. On one hand, this visualization alone clarifies the ghetto complex that we mentioned before. On the other hand, it permits us to understand the meaning of this new relationship between the Church and the Modern World. "World" is understood here, at depth, as the spirit of modern times. The consciousness of being a detached group that existed in the Church viewed this spirit as something separate from herself and, after the hot as well as cold wars were over, she sought dialogue and cooperation with it.

(Les Principes de la Theologie Catholique - Esquisse et Materiaux, Paris: Tequi, 1982, pp. 426-427).

Telesphorus · « **Reply #5 on:** November 29, 2012, 03:07:55 PM »

Quote from: bowler

Not even Mueller himself believes what he says.

These people are swimming in a cess pool.

They are not even remotely Christians.

Whether it's obscene and blasphemous art by ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ Communists in the Stefansdom museum or pedophilic catechisms in Belgium, they are fully integrated in the ʝʊdɛօ-satanic plan for the destruction of the Catholic family.

These people are a plague.

http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2012/03/cardinal-schonborn-possessed-by-his.html
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2007/jul/07073008
http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2006/02/love-vienna-style.html
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/4471

Telesphorus · « **Reply #6 on:** November 29, 2012, 03:19:15 PM »

Quote from: Archbishop Lefebvre

While we are certain that the faith the Church has taught for 20 centuries cannot contain error, we are much further from absolute certitude that the pope is truly pope

[/size]

The SSPX has departed from this!

Quote from: Bishop Fellay

It is necessary to stop saying: the Church cannot err

Quote from: Condemned in the Syllabus of Errors

23. Roman pontiffs and ecuмenical councils have wandered outside the limits of their powers, have usurped the rights of princes, and have even erred in defining matters of faith and morals. -- Damnatio "Multiplices inter," June 10, 1851.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #7 on:** November 29, 2012, 03:32:13 PM »

Quote

Koenig: "Yes, absolutely, also in Europe, but here many conciliar docuмents didn't leave the shelves. For instance, there is a lot of talk about liturgy, as if it were the sole problem that the Council faced. Further, people give too much importance to the fringes [the radicals] that tried to push ahead, and forget the authentic progress Vatican II produced. In the Church this progress took place primarily through the acknowledgment of the positive aspects of history, the sciences, and the arts - in short, those human categories that less than 100 years earlier the Syllabus had rejected and only 48 years before [the Encyclical] Pascendi had again condemned.

[/size]

http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_024_KoenigCCL.htm

Telesphorus · « **Reply #8 on:** November 29, 2012, 03:35:58 PM »

Quote from: si si no no

Finally, and in order to keep this study within limits, Ratzinger the Prefect presented the press with an "Instruction on the Theologian's Ecclesiastical Vocation," wherein he underscores the fact that this docuмent "affirms - maybe for the first time ever with such clarity - that there are decisions [which have been made in the past] of the Magisterium which are not to be considered as the final word on a given subject as such, but serve rather as a mooring in the problem, and above all, also as an expression of pastoral prudence, a kind of temporary disposition" (L'Osservatore Romano, June 27, 1990. p.6). And Ratzinger provided several examples of such temporary dispositions, which are now considered "outdated in the particularities of their determinations":

1. those "Papal declarations of the last century on religious liberty,"

2. "the anti-modernist decisions of the Pope at the beginning of this century,"

3. "the [papally approved] decisions of the Biblical Commission of that same time period."

http://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/SiSiNoNo/1994_June/They_Think_Theyve_Won_PartVI.htm

bowler · « **Reply #9 on:** November 30, 2012, 11:55:36 AM »

Quote from: Marie Auxiliadora

11/29/2012
The custodian of faith on the “heretical interpretations” of the Council
Gerhard Ludwig Müller

According to Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, traditionalists show a lack of orthodoxy when they point to the Second Vatican Council as the winter of the Catholic Church

Those who consider Vatican II, to be a break from Church Tradition, offer a “heretical interpretation” of this great ecclesiastical event. The suggestion that the traditionalist position may have “heretical” elements was made yesterday evening by Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, current Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. ..

Archbishop Müller contrasted this “singular orthodox interpretation” with a “heretical interpretation” which he identified with “the hermeneutics of a split, .. traditionalists do not want to move towards such a Church, as if it represented the winter of the Catholica.”

It's ironic that the SSPX has stopped calling the conciliar church, heretical, and now for the first time the conciliarists are now calling the SSPX, heretics.

Everyone hates a coward, even their enemies.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #10 on:** November 30, 2012, 08:26:30 PM »

Quote

by similar anachronisms in the domain of education and the attitude taken toward the modern historical-critical method .... (that is to say - their denial of the historical veracity of the Gospels, their denial of Christ - Tele)`

I'm sorry I didn't phrase this correctly so that it says the opposite of what I intended.

their attittude towards the historical-critical method is considered by Cardinal Ratzinger to be an "anachronism" - what that means is that Cardinal Ratzinger accepts the "modern" (ie, Revelation denying) methods.