Gerhard Card. Müller gave an interview to a Spanish outlet Infovaticana. The questions were good and the answers were HARD HITTING.
Diane Montagna did a translation and posted it on Twitter.
Here is an excerpt:
Q-There are some voices that have criticized the presence of the laity in this synodal Assembly.
Müller-The bishops participate in their office by exercising collegial responsibility for the whole Church together with the Pope. If the laity participate in it with the right to vote, then it is no longer a synod of bishops or an ecclesiastical conference [and] does not have the apostolic teaching authority of the episcopal college. To speak of a Vatican Council III can only occur to an ignorant person, because from the outset a Roman Synod of Bishops is not an ecumenical council—which the Pope could not subsequently declare without ignoring the divine right of the bishops to a Vatican Council III—that could fni ind a new Church surpassing or completing the one supposedly stagnated at Vatican Council II.
Whenever populist effects tip the balance towards such spontaneous decisions, the sacramental nature of the Church and its mission is obscured, even if subsequent attempts are made to justify it through the common priesthood of all believers, and to eliminate the substantial difference between it and the priesthood of sacramental ordination (Lumen Gentium 10).
Q-Are there more and more bishops and faithful expressing concern about what might happen during this Synod?
Müller-Yes, the false prophets (nebulous ideologues) who present themselves as progressives have announced that they will turn the Catholic Church into an aid organization for the 2030 Agenda. In their opinion, only a Church without Christ fits into a world without God. Many young people returned from Lisbon disappointed that the focus was no longer on salvation in Christ, but on a worldly doctrine of salvation. Apparently, there are even bishops who no longer believe in God as the origin and end of man and the Savior of the world, but who, in a pan-naturalistic or pantheistic way, consider the so-called Mother Earth as the beginning of existence, and climate neutrality as the goal of planet earth.
Loading ...
I needed to read this today, because all the Synodal cheer-leading and tongue clicking – especially within in-flight press conferences, is getting to me.
I’m really glad to see that people are prepared to not be duped as they were when the Novus Ordo was born.
Now, with all the orthodox push-back, will Big Synod™? overplay it’s hand? Or will it dial back the output so as to avoid schism?
Candidly, after years of hearing and reading about it, I still have no idea what the purpose or output is planned to be, except as a smoke screen for promoting modernism in the guise of collegial dialogue. It’s literally the dumbest global process imaginable if one hopes to have a positive outcome. But maybe the Pope just wants to make a mess.
At your prompting, Father, I looked up the recent interview with Archbishop Fernandez in which he says that The Magisterium has two functions: to preserve tradition and to develop doctrine. He baldly asserts that, as Pope, Francis is the only man on earth endowed with a unique and special charism which can actively bring new insights into the teaching of the Church
Surely this is the plainest expression of the new heresy of Papolatry?! It is a direct contradiction of the Vatican I definition of papal infallibility.
But when I read that interview I was at first shocked and then strangely comforted. I thought, ‘It’s all coming to a head’ like some poisonous and painful boil. I was hoping and praying that someone with authority and standing would speak out against this obvious and dangerous nonsense.
And I notice how Card. Müller cites Vatican II’s Lumen Gentium precisely to emphasise that the role of The Magisterium is only to safeguard the Faith, not to bring “new revelations”. As my mother (a convert from Anglicanism) used to say, “I don’t need to ring the Pope every morning to know what the Catholic Faith is today”.
2030 Agenda? How long will this synodal nonsense go on?
With the greatest sadness I find my long held suspicion confirmed by Cardinal Müller … a Church without Christ … even bishops who no longer believe in God…
This is real. It is in effect.
Everyone need abandon their rose colored glasses.
To quote the late Fr. Trinchard when asked if we need Vatican III, He responded no, we need Trent II.
Pingback: FRIDAY EXTRA – BigPulpit.com
In fairness to Card. Müller, I think the “great hour of manipulation” language referred specifically to various Synod participants giving their spin on the proceedings to the media, who are being denied live access, and not necessarily to the Synod endeavor as a whole.
Of course, in most cases these “journalists” will be willing participants in the spreading of the harmful agenda that the Cardinal fears, and the decision to deny journalists live access fosters an environment in which that can more easily occur.
It seems implausible to the point of silliness to suggest that “the media doesn’t have access” means that there won’t be lots and lots of videos taken that make their way out. The question is whether those videos will be edited and restricted by media powerhouses who only let you see the parts they want you to see. Well, does the Jan. 6th tapes tell what to think about that?
Since it is difficult to believe that God will step in and directly re-write the agenda that Francis and his bully-boyos have for Sin-nod, is the best we can realistically hope for that it all unravels of its own massive weight?