Cardinal Müller: Amoris Laetitia is in Line with Previous Teaching on Communion

The Catholic Herald (UK) ^ | 5/4/16 | Staff Reporter

[marshmallow]

The cardinal said that if the Pope had wanted to change the discipline, he would have given a full explanation

Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the head of the Vatican’s doctrinal authority, has said that Pope Francis’s recent document is consistent with previous Church teaching.

In a talk to seminarians in Oviedo, Spain, reported by the German newspaper Die Tagespost, Cardinal Müller, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), said that Amoris Laetitia does not say the divorced and remarried can take communion.

John Paul II, Benedict XVI and the CDF have all said in the last 35 years that the divorced and remarried should not take communion unless they live “in complete continence”.

Cardinal Müller told the seminarians: “If Amoris Laetitia wanted to overturn such a deep-rooted and important discipline, it would have expressed this precisely and given reasons for it”.

[“Hätte Amoris Laetitia eine so verwurzelte und so gewichtige Disziplin aufkündigen wollen, hätte es sich deutlich ausgedrückt und die Gründe dafür angegeben.”]

Cardinals Christoph Schönborn, Raymond Burke and Vincent Nichols have all said that Amoris Laetitia is in line with John Paul II’s Familiaris Consortio (1981), which said: “The Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried.

“They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist.”

Last week the prominent German philosopher Robert Spaemann said that Amoris Laetitia’s footnote 351 contradicted Church teaching. Spaemann said it implied that the divorced and remarried could be admitted to the Eucharist even if they were still sleeping together.

[marshmallow]

The cardinal said that if the Pope had wanted to change the discipline, he would have given a full explanation

No, that's not how it's done. The discipline can not be changed without rupture and provoking schism since it would fly in the face of Familiaris Consortio amongst other documents. The Pope wants to change pastoral practice, first and foremost. The discipline can wait and will play catch-up once pastoral practice has rendered it obsolete.

That's the modernist template; change by stealth and incrementalism. Muller is either obtuse or is trying to paper over the cracks.

[Syncopated]

I really want to learn more about Church history. Catholicism is so darn fascinating.

[BlatherNaut]

https://vericatholici.wordpress.com/2016/05/02/alconf-international-conference-to-condemn-amoris-laetitia-june-25th/

#ALConf — International Conference to condemn ‘Amoris Laetitia’: June 25th

A Pilgrimage of Grace & Mercy
Rome, May 2, 2016 A.D.: Veri Catholici, announces that it will hold a Conference/Manifestation in Rome, on Saturday June 25th to condemn the errors contained in the papal document, Amoris Laetitia, and demand in the name of all that is holy and true in the Catholic Religion, that the document be rescinded and that its authors and supporters repent publicly and undo the scandal they have caused.

Veri Catholici, an international association of Catholics dedicated to opposing the errors promoted by Cardinal Kasper, is calling on all Catholics in the world to join us in Rome to condemn the document Amoris Laetitia and its many errors, and to demand from the Pope and Sacred Hierarchy that the document be withdrawn and its errors condemned, formally and canonically.

We intend this conference to be a universal manifestation of the true Sensus Fidelium of Christ’s Mystical Body. We believe it absolutely necessary to take this initiative for the good of Holy Mother Church and the salvation of souls...

[ebb tide]

Bravo!

[Unam Sanctam]

I think you are being too hard on the good Cardinal. I think both he and Cardinal Burke are taking the long view and laying the arguments as to why Francis’ Amoris Laetitia does not trump the Magisterium of St JP II in Familiaris Consortio and indeed the traditional teaching od Christ and the Church. It is necessary work, and is not in opposition to those who point out substantive problems with the AL text like Bishop Schneider. I’m glad both fronts are being pursued.

[marshmallow]

I saw that a few days ago. Looks like the CDF won't be there based on Muller's punt here.

I hope they hold their "manifestation" outside Casa Santa Marta so Francis gets an earful. He's all in favor of the laity "making a mess", isn't he?

[SGNA]

Good for you. On this subject the best reference is:

CASTI CONNUBII - ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI ON CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE DECEMBER 31, 1930

Note that Pius XI states the perennial teaching of the Church which is the primary end of marriage is the procreation of children. Since Montini's encyclical on the same subject in 1966 does NOT state this, that immediately red flags it.

Deal only with official Church teaching from before 1958 - i.e. before Vatican-2. Below is a good compendium of papal encyclicals, apostolic constitutions, etc. If you have any particular area of interest, feel free to ask.

Papal Documents

[Syncopated]

I’m going to need some structure to this trove of information. I should sign up for a few non-credit courses in Church encyclical history and their context.

History can be so overwhelming in its depth that you stare gape-mouthed without a guide.

Rerum Novarum and Providentissimus Deus are the most important ones I knew about in passing. I’ll start with those. :) Thanks.

[SGNA]

I think we all need something uplifting about now. Here are a few good ones. You'll note that in contrast to the heretical post-Vatican-2 gobbledy-gook, these are clearly written - because they have nothing to hide.

THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION - Ineffabilis - Deus - Apostolic Constitution issued by Pope Pius IX on December 8, 1854.

DEFINING THE DOGMA OF THE ASSUMPTION - Munificentissimus Deus - Encyclical of Pope Pius XII issued November 1, 1950

HAURIETIS AQUAS - ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XII ON DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART MAY 15, 1956

[SGNA]

As for present problems, consult the following.

The first is a codification of Divine Law and as such is immutable. For Bergoglio et alia refer to section 6.

"Cum ex Apostolatus Officio" - Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul IV, 15th February 1559 - (Roman Bullarium Vol. IV. Sec. I, pp. 354-357)

The latter two, are partial listings of condemned heresies and errors. They have encyclicals associated with them as well - just check a nearby date on the list.

THE SYLLABUS OF ERRORS CONDEMNED BY PIUS IX - 1864

SYLLABUS CONDEMNING THE ERRORS OF THE MODERNISTS - LAMENTABILI SANE - Pius X July 3, 1907

[piusv]

Or he is a Modernist too.

[piusv]

Too bad... they are 50+ years too late. Vatican II needs to be rescinded first and foremost. Until they recognize this they are still part of the problem.

[SGNA]

Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller subtly denying the Bodily Resurrection of Christ

Excerpt:

"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;

“The realization of the reality of the transcendental event is triggered by the Easter manifestations. The belief of the disciples is the historically-verifiable sign that points to the Easter event and through which the Easter event becomes accessible” (p. 301;

“Whether the women’s visit to the tomb in the early Easter morning and the discovery that the Body of Jesus is [sic] no longer there, was a historical occurrence in the manner portrayed, does not need to be decided here. It’s possible that this [narrative] reflected a veneration of the tomb by the community of Jerusalem” (p. 303;