Thursday, January 04, 2018

Cdl. Muller follow Pope Benedict XVI's Example: Retract your Statement that is Anathema by Trent

Cardinal Gerhard Muller is anathema by the infallible Council of Trent for saying to the question asked below:

In your introductory essay to Buttiglione's book, you speak of at least one exception concerning the sacraments for those who live a second union, that concerning those who cannot obtain marriage annulment in court but are convinced in conscience of the nullity of the first marriage. This hypothesis was already considered, in 2000, by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. In this case, can we open the way to the sacraments? Could Amoris laetitia be considered a development of that position? 

"Cardinal Ratzinger wanted to reflect on this without having a ready-made solution... It is possible that the penitent may be convinced in conscience, and with good reasons, of the invalidity of the first marriage even though they cannot offer canonical proof. In this case the marriage valid before God would be the second one and the pastor could grant the sacrament." (Vatican Insider, "Muller, 'Buttiglione's book dispelled the cardinals' dubia,'" December 31, 2017)[]

In simple words, Muller said a penitent and a priest can decide on "matrimonial causes" between themselves and therefore matrimonial causes do not belong to Church judges (ecclesiastical judges).

 "Canon XII. -If any one saith that matrimonial causes do not belong to ecclesiastical judges; let him be anathema."

Cardinal Gerhard Muller it appears accepts the claims by his interviewer that Pope Benedict XVI in some 2000 writings supported his new teaching that is anathema by Trent.

All the writings of Ratzinger as Cardinal and as Pope Benedict, that I know of, officially flatly contradicted Muller's new error that is anathema by Trent. For example, he didn't say along with Muller that the "penitent may be convinced in conscience, and with good reasons," but said the "conscience of the individual is bound to this norm without exception":

"a. Epikeia and aequitas canonica exist in the sphere of human and purely ecclesiastical norms of great significance, but cannot be applied to those norms over which the Church has no discretionary authority. The indissoluble nature of marriage is one of these norms which goes back to Christ Himself and is thus identified as a norm of divine law. The Church cannot sanction pastoral practices - for example, sacramental pastoral practices - which contradict the clear instruction of the Lord.
In other words, if the prior marriage of two divorced and remarried members of the faithful was valid, under no circumstances can their new union be considered lawful and therefore reception of the sacraments is intrinsically impossible. The conscience of the individual is bound to this norm without exception.[2]" (CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
Muller: Where is Pope Benedict's Supposed Writings that are Anathema by Trent?

If Muller were any kind scholar in the least degree, he would have quoted the supposed statement of Benedict and have stated what the title of the statement was at the minimum.

If the 1972 essay is what Muller is speaking of, he failed to note that CNA on December 4, 2014 reported that Benedict retracted the 1972 essay issued before he was a Cardinal or Pope that said the divorced and "remarried" could receive Communion.

"News broke weeks ago that a new volume of Benedict XVI's collected works was being released in German with an updated version of a 1972 essay, which no longer suggests that the divorced and remarried can receive Communion, as it once did..."

"But as doctrine developed, Ratzinger moved away from his 1972 essay, humbly retracting the suggestion he had then offered."

"In 1991, he wrote that the suggestions had been made 'as a theologian in 1972. Their implementation in pastoral practice would of course necessarily depend on their corroboration by an official act of the magisterium to whose judgment I would submit … Now the Magisterium subsequently spoke decisively on this question in the person of (St. John Paul II) in Familiaris consortio...'"

"Magister's Dec. 3 article includes both the original conclusion of Ratzinger's 1972 essay, and the new conclusion written in 2014. He writes that 'it comes as no surprise … that Ratzinger should have maintained that it was inappropriate for Kasper to cite his 1972 article in support of his own theses, as if nothing had happened after that year.'" []

If this is the writings he referred to, Muller if he is a honest man needs to acknowledge this fact which he failed to bring forward.

Muller needs to follow Benedict's example and retract the statement he made above that is anathema by Trent.

Pray a Our Father now that the Dubia Cardinals issue the correction and that Muller is not the next pope. 

No comments: