FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Gerhard Müller is indeed a heretic, and blasphemer
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
Scheeben: 
Quote: This permanent and perfect virginity of the body of Mary is de fide, especially since the definition by the Fifth Ecumenical Council (can. 2), and by the Lateran Council under Martin I (can. 3). (2)

Muller says the dogma is not so much about the physiological details (typically vague Modernist comment).  However you slice it, this is heretical.  The dogma is absolutely about the physiological details, precisely because the virgin birth has nothing whatsoever to do with the marriage act, and therefore "virginity" in that context cannot refer to anything but the physiological integrity being preserved by a miracle.

Those who say that perhaps the birth was natural in all respects except the physiological effects, are missing the point.  Muller doesn't say that, or imply it.  He says that the dogma not so much about the physiological details.  YES IT IS.  Even on the theory that the birth was natural in all respects except the physiological effects, the whole point is the absence of those effects. 

See how Modernists confuse everything and create doubt where there should be none?  See how they damage the faith by their speculations, their ambiguous language, their DOUBTS about everything?  We've seen it right here, amongst people who are more alert than the average pew-sitter.  It's terrifying.  And why is Muller dangerous?  Why are people inclined to try and beleive that his heretical ideas are somehow orthodox?  Because Benedict has given him one of the highest offices in the Church.  What a terrifying situation this whole thing is.

"To deceive, if possible, the Elect."
(07-10-2012, 06:04 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]Sedes are as bad as heretics: they destroy trust in the Papacy. Watch me not cry a river if this topic goes to the cornfield.

I dare to say it is quite the opposite, but I disgress (banned topic)
Right jesusbrea.  I think I am within the confines of the rules by saying that of nything casts doubt on the papacy it is the novus ordo program.  It is that which is at odds with the papacy.  Not traditionalism
Alright, I'm game.  If somebody can find me the relevant Müller quotes in German, I'll undertake to translate a few paragraphs.  I am studying German anyway this summer, after all.

Can't say I expect to convince the nay-sayers, but it'll be neat to put my skills to the test.
Allow me to go on record as believing in the virginal integrity of Our Lady in the very act of her giving birth to Our Savior, as well as her immunity from birth pains (as she likewise was free from concupiscience and ignorance, two other effects of original sin, from which she was preserved).
Second what SouthPaw Link said.

Also, the best source I'm finding so far as a starting point is this site:  http://pius.info/offizielle-stellungnahm...of-mueller

I'm posting it mainly for myself to come back to later, but if anybody speaks Deutsch, they can at least get the proper name of Bp. Muller's book on the Holy Mass there.

Of course, the original press statement by the SSPX was in German, so I see no real need to review their work-- they clearly know how to speak German, as well as knowing Church teaching.  But like I said, there's no harm in retracing the steps of fellow scholars for the sake of practice.
(07-10-2012, 11:03 PM)SouthpawLink Wrote: [ -> ]Allow me to go on record as believing in the virginal integrity of Our Lady in the very act of her giving birth to Our Savior, as well as her immunity from birth pains (as she likewise was free from concupiscience and ignorance, two other effects of original sin, from which she was preserved).

This. Good to see you back.
Slightly off topic, but what does it mean to say that the Virgin Mary was immune from ignorance? Obviously, the scene in Luke in which St. Joseph and the Virgin Mary do not understand Christ when he tells them that he must go about his Father's business would seem to go against this. I'm not rejecting the idea, but I would like to see a source or something if anyone has one.
(07-10-2012, 11:51 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: [ -> ]Slightly off topic, but what does it mean to say that the Virgin Mary was immune from ignorance? Obviously, the scene in Luke in which St. Joseph and the Virgin Mary do not understand Christ when he tells them that he must go about his Father's business would seem to go against this. I'm not rejecting the idea, but I would like to see a source or something if anyone has one.

Ignorance is the absence of due knowledge, not the same thing as nescience, which is the absence of knowledge per se.

So Our Lady was not nescient of anything which was useful or good for her to know, just like Adam before the fall.  St. Thomas explains the various kinds of "lacks of knowledge" in the Summa.

I've often wondered about that scene also, in the light of this doctrine.  The part that causes me some difficulty is that our Lady was "sorrowing" over the loss of Jesus, and it says that she and Joseph thought he was "with the company".  This seems to suggest that she thought something that was not true, but that's impossible.  She could think anything that was not true.  It would be good to check a Lapide or some other good exegete for the explanation.
(07-10-2012, 11:51 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: [ -> ]Slightly off topic, but what does it mean to say that the Virgin Mary was immune from ignorance? Obviously, the scene in Luke in which St. Joseph and the Virgin Mary do not understand Christ when he tells them that he must go about his Father's business would seem to go against this. I'm not rejecting the idea, but I would like to see a source or something if anyone has one.

Luke 2:44-51

44 And thinking that he was in the company, they came a day's journey, and sought him among their kinsfolks and acquaintance.
45 And not finding him, they returned into Jerusalem, seeking him.
46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, hearing them, and asking them questions.
47 And all, that heard him, were astonished at his wisdom, and his answers.
48 And seeing him, they wondered. And his mother said to him: Son, why hast thou done so to us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee, sorrowing.
49 And he said to them: How is it that you sought me? did you not know, that I must be about the things that are my Father's?
50 And they understood not the word that he spoke unto them.
51 And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth: and was subject to them. And his mother kept all these words in her heart.

Haydock commentary:

Ver. 44. It may be asked how the blessed Virgin and St. Joseph could possibly have come so far without missing him; but we must take notice, that when the people went up to the temple from remote parts of Judea, the men went in one company, and the women in a separate company, whilst the children went in either company indifferently: so that St. Joseph imagined that he was with Mary, his mother, whilst she imagined he was with St. Joseph. (Nicholas of Lyra)

Ver. 49. I must be about the things that are my Father's? By these words he shewed, that not St. Joseph, but only God, was his father. (Witham)

Ver. 50. They understood not, &c. That is, knew not when, or by what means, Christ designed to make himself known to the world. (Witham)

Ver. 51. Was subject to them. Astonishing humility! which the Son of God was pleased to teach by his example, as also obedience to parents. (Witham) --- The evangelist relates nothing of our Saviour from the age of twelve till the age of thirty, except that he was subject to St. Joseph and the blessed Virgin. The divine Spirit shewing by this, that nothing is so great and amiable in Christians, as ready obedience to the directions of their superiors. (Barradius) --- All children are hereby taught what subjection and obedience is due from them to their parents.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38