2 February 2017

Cardinal Mueller's Interview: the Cat is now Skinned even more thoroughly than before ....

Cardinal Mueller's 'interview' seems to me exactly what the current crisis in the Church required. Since, as he makes clear, his Dicastery is the organ which is charged with issuing doctrinal clarifications, he has adroitly set down a marker which automatically puts certain bishops in the wrong; I mean those prelates who have impertinently given their own "interpretations" which run contrary to his Eminence's clear explanations. He has wrong-footed those who had appealed to an alleged letter to some Argentinian bishops ... the existence of which I for one will not accept until I see it officially in print in AAS. And he has put a ring of defence round faithful bishops, such as Bishop Lopes, Bishop Egan, Archbishop Chaput. Nobody, however lofty, can take them on now without finding themselves also taking on the man who is specifically commissioned by the Sovereign Pontiff himself to be his doctrinal arm. Not a good day for Cardinal Farrell!! Probably not a good day, either, for 'Archbishop' 'Tucho' Fernandez. Or Mgr Rio Tinto. Et ubi nunc Scicluna?

And Mueller has deftly resurrected Veritatis Splendor. Unaccountably, the drafters of Amoris laetitia appeared to have mislaid their copies of that document, one of the most important doctrinal interventions of a Roman Pontiff in the twentieth century. (The Polish Bishops, I imagine, will be particularly gratified and chuffed by the Mueller Interview ... Gaude, Regina Poloniae!) Also resurrected is part of an important paragraph of Familiaris consortio which unaccountably slipped from the typeset when the first part of the same paragraph was reproduced in Amoris laetitia. And he has reprimanded those who construct revolutionary edifices upon the basis of a couple of possibly ambiguous footnotes [see my piece of January 16].

Happily, the Cardinal Prefect has implicitly and usefully contextualised the remarks which Cardinal the Graf von Schoenborn made when he was 'presenting' Amoris laetitia. Since doctrinal explanation of a document addressed (I presume) to the Universal Church is more the function of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith than it is of the Archiepiscopal See, however glorious, of Vienna, any elements of the Graf's 'presentation' which may be considered by some to be inconsistent with Cardinal Mueller's explanations must now clearly fall to the ground, where they may well get trampled under foot as all right-thinking men (and women) rush to open the prosecco.


His Eminence has reprobated a particular error which was raised in one of the Synods; and by the clearest implication he has put out of court the notion that different episcopal conferences might lawfully confect contrary and contradictory "interpretations" of Amoris laetitia.

And all this on the same day as that on which the splendid Statement of our four wonderful and faithful Confraternities of Catholic Clergy came out!!

Come along, all you grumpies! Rejoice! At least for today!

A good day for orthodoxy! 

Fugite, partes adversae!!!

20 comments:

mark wauck said...

The timing of Mueller's comments seems particularly important, in view of developments in the Knights of Malta affair--it's beginning to look like that may have been part of a move against Cardinal Burke.

And speaking of Malta, earlier this week Ed Pentin reported on remarks by one of the Maltese bishops, Scicluna, which articulate the ne plus ultra of hyperueberultramontanist papalism:

“Whoever wishes to discover what Jesus wants from him, he must ask the Pope, this Pope, not the one who came before him, or the one who came before that. This present Pope."

Reader said...

and yet, he DEFENDS A.L., the very source of the wayward bishops' wrong ideas.

Fr John Hunwicke said...

Dear Reader

Two points: AL is not the "very source" of all this. Kasper's endeavours go back decades. And JP2 has been justly criticised even by his admirers for not getting a grip on episcopal appointments in Germany and elsewhere.

I hope this doesn't sound too condescending, but one really does need to read between the lines, nowadays, of whatever anybody says. And to remember that what somebody doesn't say is as important as what they do say.

Capt. Morgan said...

I am quite pleased that Cardinal Muller has decided to stand fast on orthodoxy. Now we wait to see if the Holy Father will speak in support of him, or reassign him to some out of the way hole from whence he cannot have effect.

Steve said...

Thank you father! You have lifted my day.

UnanimousConsent said...

And it's not a surprise that both Cardinal Farrell and the head of the Signatura have an audience today after this.

Steve T. said...

I'm expecting Cardinal Mueller to be transferred to become the ordinary of Mauritius shortly.

Simple Simon said...

Fr H, rejoicing for today. And for tomorrow and forever, since ‘God’s providence rises before the sun’. And especially before Pope Francis and Friends. Deo Gratias. 1 Cor 15:57-58.

Christopher Boegel said...

I am smiling for the 1stbtime in weeks Father H.

Michael Leahy said...

Father H., thank you for one of the most encouraging essays I have had the pleasure to read for a long time.

Prayerful said...

Hopefully this will restrain a particular constituency of bishops. Perhaps they might exercise a little more restraint in interpreting the 'Voice of the Holy Spirit' (Pope Francis according to one of the new US Cardinals).

JARay said...

It is indeed wonderful to read your article Fr. Hunwicke.

neilmac said...

"Whoever wishes to discover what Jesus wants from him, he must ask the Pope, this Pope, not the one who came before him, or the one who came before that. This present Pope." - Bishop Scicluna

Oh well, I think I ought to go to find my pinch of incense to offer before a public picture of Bergoglio.

Rose Marie said...

Cdl. Müller says AL is not the source of the confusion. That is true in the sense that Kasper & Co. have been pushing Communion for adulterers for decades. But AL is the first papal document touching the subject that fails to state clearly that adulterers cannot receive the sacraments, and this after a two-year process focussed on that question. AL doesn't say they can, but it doesn't say they can't. It even implies that they can, after saying that conscience reigns supreme.

So AL is the source of the present confusion, because it failed to teach the Faith clearly. That is what Pope Honorius I was anathematized for. Faithfully proclaiming the deposit of the faith is what Pastor Aeternus requires of the Successor of Peter, in the passage that our host has so helpfully quoted for us. Cdl. Müller is trying to close the gap left by AL, thus giving cover to the silence of the Pope. He has already said there was no need for the dubia. Now he is implying there is no need for a formal correction. I don't think the cat is skinned. I think it is out of the bag. BTW, I apologize for the mixed metaphor, as the first cat is a catfish, a bottom-feeding denizen of American waters that is tough to skin but delicious to eat.

David said...

Polonia semper fidelis!

Nicolas Bellord said...

Sorry but this is not Cardinal Muller speaking as Prefect of the CDF but merely him giving his personal views. I have done a precis and some comments at:

http://guildofblessedtitus.blogspot.co.uk/

The Cardinal says the only person who can interpret AL is the Pope himself. He overlooks the fact that he has given his interpretation to the Buenos Aires Bishops in a letter which I am quite sure is genuine. That interpretation does not agree with Cardinal Muller's views and is heretical.

John Nolan said...

Wasn't Fernandez having a pop at Veritatis Splendor in the articles which were recycled for AL?

Mike Hurcum said...

Is it time for good catholic men to march upon Rome

Nicolas Bellord said...

@neilmac: That is a truly amazing statement which one find confirmed at:

http://biblefalseprophet.com/2017/02/01/abp-scicluna-of-malta-i-insist-upon-is-that-we-have-followed-the-popes-directives/

I must read it more carefully to-morrow but it seems that the Maltese bishops were convinced by the business with the Buenos Aires Bishops that that was the correct and only interpretation and they have repeated it. They seem to be saying that this teaching is unique to Pope Francis - no previous Pope has taught this. Are they saying that we have a completely new Church separate from the Church that has survived for two thousand years? Are they acting in a very subtle way to pull the rug from under Pope Francis in an extraordinary manner?

Liam Ronan said...

I suggest, Father, that there are ordinary cats and Lewis Carroll's Cheshire cat, the latter being a tad more tricky to skin.