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
JBH, my friend, sometimes, when it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, and turns upside down to look for food underwater, it's just not a cougar.

It's not like this is anything new.  As INPEFESS said in the other thread, this nonsense has been going on for decades.  We should really stop being surprised by it.  I sure as heck wasn't expecting it this time-- I have no desire to think our pope is a heretic, or condones them.  But as INPEFESS said, I should have known better.
(07-07-2012, 11:03 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-07-2012, 10:46 PM)JuniorCouncilor Wrote: [ -> ]Denial isn't just a river in Africa.

Denial isn't a river in Africa at all. The Nile is. Heretic.

See what I did there?

What he should have said is "Denile" isn't merely a river in Africa.  "That would simply be absurd for the modern mind to accept.  The significance of "denile" is looking at the river as a symbol of God's unbelievable love for each one of us, that is personal and unique, and everyone simultaneously experiences this objective truth in a subjective way.  It's an encounter with the living Christ which is the driving force of our eternal rest in God who is ourselves in its purest form"  -Gerard

(taken from Dogmaticsch Gobbledygook ;Bafflegab Press-1994).
(07-07-2012, 11:57 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]Here's an example of what I suspect the OP or his source did:

Original:
Quote:The error consists in thinking that they are saved by their religion.  They are saved in their religion but not by it. There is no Buddhist church in heaven, no Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God.  As priests we must state the truth.

Example Version:
Quote:... they are saved by their religion. There is ... Buddhist church in heaven ... Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God.  As priests we must state the truth.
Source:http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-10.htm

If some poster were to butcher the SSPX quote like that, and publish it and the scandal of its meaning rather widely, wouldn't the SSPX defend themselves and supply the true context pretty quickly?

Will Bishop Müller or his defenders be doing the same, and in a manner that would be understood by traditional Catholics - the ones who are complaining?  
(07-08-2012, 01:45 AM)Doce Me Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-07-2012, 11:57 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]Here's an example of what I suspect the OP or his source did:

Original:
Quote:The error consists in thinking that they are saved by their religion.  They are saved in their religion but not by it. There is no Buddhist church in heaven, no Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God.  As priests we must state the truth.

Example Version:
Quote:... they are saved by their religion. There is ... Buddhist church in heaven ... Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God.  As priests we must state the truth.
Source:http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-10.htm

If some poster were to butcher the SSPX quote like that, and publish it and the scandal of its meaning rather widely, wouldn't the SSPX defend themselves and supply the true context pretty quickly?

Will Bishop Müller or his defenders be doing the same, and in a manner that would be understood by traditional Catholics - the ones who are complaining?  
True.
I don't think bp Muller can re-write his published books in time for a rebuttal.

(07-08-2012, 01:41 AM)Gerard Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-07-2012, 11:03 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-07-2012, 10:46 PM)JuniorCouncilor Wrote: [ -> ]Denial isn't just a river in Africa.

Denial isn't a river in Africa at all. The Nile is. Heretic.

See what I did there?

What he should have said is "Denile" isn't merely a river in Africa.  "That would simply be absurd for the modern mind to accept.  The significance of "denile" is looking at the river as a symbol of God's unbelievable love for each one of us, that is personal and unique, and everyone simultaneously experiences this objective truth in a subjective way.  It's an encounter with the living Christ which is the driving force of our eternal rest in God who is ourselves in its purest form"  -Gerard

(taken from Dogmaticsch Gobbledygook ;Bafflegab Press-1994).

lol
(07-06-2012, 11:44 PM)John Lane Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-06-2012, 06:56 PM)Scriptorium Wrote: [ -> ]Mr. Lane, have you read any of Bishop Muller's work in question, except the soundbite quote used in online articles and blogs?

No, I haven't. 

1.  He writes just like Kasper, Rahner, Ratzinger, and all the other Modernists.  To anybody who is familiar with Catholic theological writing, and Modernist writing, it is as recognisable as a New York cab.

You haven't read his work yet you can tell us about how he writes? Okay..

Besides, I'm not particularly sure that the status of the BVM's hymen has much to do with her perpetual virginity.
(07-08-2012, 03:07 AM)Aragon Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-06-2012, 11:44 PM)John Lane Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-06-2012, 06:56 PM)Scriptorium Wrote: [ -> ]Mr. Lane, have you read any of Bishop Muller's work in question, except the soundbite quote used in online articles and blogs?

No, I haven't. 

1.  He writes just like Kasper, Rahner, Ratzinger, and all the other Modernists.  To anybody who is familiar with Catholic theological writing, and Modernist writing, it is as recognisable as a New York cab.

You haven't read his work yet you can tell us about how he writes? Okay..

Besides, I'm not particularly sure that the status of the BVM's hymen has much to do with her perpetual virginity.

It's all academic non-sense until you look at a fuller context. If you look at Mr. Lane's first post, he had to bracket in "The perpetual virginity of Mary". That may well be what is the "missing link," but it could just as well have been "The doctrinal foundation of this dogma." Who knows! Mr. Lane doesn't, to be sure, but he's already reaching for the noose. Anyone with fundamental research skills laughs on the sidelines as they watch traditionalists make fools of themselves. Even if the text turns out to be what everyone suspects, we'd still look silly jumping to conclusions, and then trying to look righteous and wise of the back end when things just happen to line up with our pre-judgements. What a display!
(07-08-2012, 01:45 AM)Doce Me Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-07-2012, 11:57 PM)jonbhorton Wrote: [ -> ]Here's an example of what I suspect the OP or his source did:

Original:
Quote:The error consists in thinking that they are saved by their religion.  They are saved in their religion but not by it. There is no Buddhist church in heaven, no Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God.  As priests we must state the truth.

Example Version:
Quote:... they are saved by their religion. There is ... Buddhist church in heaven ... Protestant church. This is perhaps hard to accept, but it is the truth. I did not found the Church, but rather Our Lord the Son of God.  As priests we must state the truth.
Source:http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/Chapter-10.htm

If some poster were to butcher the SSPX quote like that, and publish it and the scandal of its meaning rather widely, wouldn't the SSPX defend themselves and supply the true context pretty quickly?

Will Bishop Müller or his defenders be doing the same, and in a manner that would be understood by traditional Catholics - the ones who are complaining?  

I have no idea, and the SSPX is an organization... whereas Bishop Müller is one man. The point is things can be skewed by the slightest of omissions in the correct place. I had never heard of +Müller before his appointment. I could care less. The Church is the Church.

The ones complaining are doing so about a quote that is, as my example, unsatisfactory.

The fact that the OP, as Scriptorium says, brackets, etc, is cause for concern nothing heretical was said. Nothing is overtly said in that manner anyway.

Maybe the man has some wacky ideas...

But John Lane's post is just laughable. A Journalist would confirm that quote and context if they were worth their salt. Half the folks here just gobble it up with nary a thought of confirming otherwise.
Cardinal Muller's statements about transubstantiation are at least scandalous and offensive to pious ears (if not in actual dogmatic error).

However, the Church's definition of Mary's perpetual virginity simply means that Mary never had sexual intercourse. Muller does not deny this; he just points out that her hymen probably broke while she was giving birth to Christ. Muller's view, historically at least, hasn't been the most popular theological opinion, but it's not heretical.
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