FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: CDF Chief says 'no struggle between the Holy See and [LCWR]'
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
In the exact same interview where Abp. Gerhard Mueller declared Bishop Richard Williamson, SSPX to be not a Catholic bishop (contradicting official Vatican statements in the past), +Mueller deigned to enlighten the world with this golden nugget.

Quote:Interviewer:  Finally, what is the situation regarding the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR)? The congregation recently issued a doctrinal assessment calling for a renewal of this American organization. Is there a continuing struggle between the CDF and the organization?

Mueller:  There is no struggle between the Holy See and this organization, but we do want to help the LCWR in its renewal of religious life — precisely because of the importance of religious life for the Church. In our times, such renewal will only be possible if there is a renewed commitment to the three vows [chastity, poverty and obedience] and a new identification with our Catholic faith and life. We cannot fulfill our mission if we are split, everyone speaking against one another, working against one another, or accepting ideas from outside that don’t belong to our faith. And we cannot accept doctrines about sexuality that don’t respect the fundamental essentials of revealed anthropology. So we must find new ways to serve the society of today, not waste our time with “civil wars” inside the Catholic Church. We must work together and have confidence.


Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/arc...z28TkcwE00

Emphases are mine.

This is the guardian of Catholic doctrine, the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. 
National Catholic Register Wrote:Finally, what is the situation regarding the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR)? The congregation recently issued a doctrinal assessment calling for a renewal of this American organization. Is there a continuing struggle between the CDF and the organization?

There is no struggle between the Holy See and this organization, but we do want to help the LCWR in its renewal of religious life — precisely because of the importance of religious life for the Church. In our times, such renewal will only be possible if there is a renewed commitment to the three vows [chastity, poverty and obedience] and a new identification with our Catholic faith and life. We cannot fulfill our mission if we are split, everyone speaking against one another, working against one another, or accepting ideas from outside that don’t belong to our faith. And we cannot accept doctrines about sexuality that don’t respect the fundamental essentials of revealed anthropology. So we must find new ways to serve the society of today, not waste our time with “civil wars” inside the Catholic Church. We must work together and have confidence.

But it is important to remember that at no time in the history of the Church has a group or a movement in one country ever been successful when it has taken an attitude against Rome, when it has been “anti-Rome.” Setting oneself up against “Rome” has never brought authentic reform or renewal to the Church. Only through a renewed commitment to the full teaching of Christ and his Church, and through a renewed spirit of collaboration with the Holy Father and the bishops in communion with him, will there be renewal and new life in the Catholic Church and a new evangelization of our society. Preaching the Gospel of Christ to a weary world so desperately in need of its liberating truth — this must be our priority.


Fixed the quotation for you.
I don't see the point of your post, mpr.

Just seems to highlight the double speak is all.
So what seems to be the problem? The LCWR has to accept the magisterial teachings of the Catholic Church just like everybody else.
So, what I said about protties and Müller stands.
(10-05-2012, 09:57 PM)m.PR Wrote: [ -> ]Fixed the quotation for you.

It's true that everything after the first clause is critical of the LCWR, but this ignores the fact that the paragraph itself is a device invented by the modernists to hide their treachery. Speak as if you were designing bumper stickers or don't speak at all.
(10-05-2012, 11:56 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-05-2012, 09:57 PM)m.PR Wrote: [ -> ]Fixed the quotation for you.

It's true that everything after the first clause is critical of the LCWR, but this ignores the fact that the paragraph itself is a device invented by the modernists to hide their treachery. Speak as if you were designing bumper stickers or don't speak at all.

Someone should start a CP Ripping on Trads in a Sarcastic Way Ticker.  We could see how many you get in a day.  This would give you an objective measure to see how fruitful of a day you've had on FE. 

We could all cheer you on as you go for the high score.
(10-06-2012, 12:31 AM)Walty Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-05-2012, 11:56 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-05-2012, 09:57 PM)m.PR Wrote: [ -> ]Fixed the quotation for you.

It's true that everything after the first clause is critical of the LCWR, but this ignores the fact that the paragraph itself is a device invented by the modernists to hide their treachery. Speak as if you were designing bumper stickers or don't speak at all.

Someone should start a CP Ripping on Trads in a Sarcastic Way Ticker.  We could see how many you get in a day.  This would give you an objective measure to see how fruitful of a day you've had on FE. 

We could all cheer you on as you go for the high score.

:LOL:
(10-05-2012, 11:09 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote: [ -> ]Just seems to highlight the double speak is all.

I see no doublespeak. The clause CollegeCatholic highlighted only means that Rome is not out to destroy the Leadership Conference of Women Religious -- and what I highlighted expresses clearly what he thinks is wrong with it. Just because an organization is sick and even harmful does not mean that it needs to be razed.


(10-05-2012, 11:29 PM)Phillipus Iacobus Wrote: [ -> ]So, what I said about protties and Müller stands.

I don't know what that was. Could you repeat it? Just for the record. Quoting yourself would suffice.
(10-06-2012, 08:29 PM)m.PR Wrote: [ -> ]
(10-05-2012, 11:29 PM)Phillipus Iacobus Wrote: [ -> ]So, what I said about protties and Müller stands.

I don't know what that was. Could you repeat it? Just for the record. Quoting yourself would suffice.

I would have to find the quote, but it was something to the effect that there was no point for dialogue with the SSPX, but dialogue with Protestants, and even non-believers is okay, because of the Assisi event, inviting the Patriarch of Constantinople each Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul, etc.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8