Müller, Protestants & Justification
#1
Müller, Protestants & Justification
Robert P. Banaugh, Ph.D.
http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopi...cation.htm

Archbishop Gerhard Müller, the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, believes that the Protestants are already part of the Church. On October 11, 2011, in a speech in homage of Protestant “bishop” Johannes Friedrich in Bavaria, Archbishop Müller said these words:

“Baptism is the fundamental sign that sacramentally unites us in Christ, and which presents us as the one Church before the world. Thus, we as Catholic and Evangelical Christians are already united even in what we call the visible Church. Strictly speaking, there are not several Churches, one beside the other – rather these are divisions and separations within the one people and house of God.” (news report here)

Now, if the Protestants are already in the one Catholic Church, they do not need to convert. Thus, according to Müller, Protestantism is enough to save their members and bring them to Heaven. Indirectly, therefore, the doctrine of justification enters the stage again.

This is what gives new momentum to this article by Dr. Robert Banaugh. It is a part of larger study titled Destruction of the Traditional Faith that can be read here (http://www.alcazar.net/destruction.html). Titles and sub-titles are ours. - The Editor

______________________


It seems that it is no longer a tenet of the Catholic Faith that works and deeds are required for salvation, because “one is now justified by faith alone.”

Muller on the Protestants: "We are the same Church"

On October 31, 1999, officials from both the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation signed the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. When asked if Catholics can now say that individuals are justified by faith alone, Jeffrey Cross, a spokesman for the National Conference of Bishops, said: “Yes, in fact the text says that very clearly.”

Nancy Frazier O’Brien of the Catholic News Service made a similar statement saying: “The signing marked the end of a long, sometimes difficult journey from mutual Lutheran-Catholic condemnations to agreement that justification and salvation come by faith alone.” (1)

Statements like these from conciliar Church officials - when bolstered by the facts that the accord was presented with great fanfare and Rome has not publicly or formally refuted it - implies in the eyes of the faithful that the Conciliar Church now teaches one is justified by faith alone.

Catholic teaching

The affirmations of the Lutherans that one is saved by faith alone were condemned at the Council of Trent in the 16th century. This was a dogmatic council whose deliberations were approved by Pope Paul III. The fact that the Catholic doctrine on justification must be adhered to for salvation was clearly stated in Session 6, chap. 16 of the Council:

“After this Catholic doctrine of justification - which, unless he faithfully and firmly accepts, no one can be justified – it seemed good to the holy Synod to add these canons, so that all may know, not only what they must hold and follow, but also what they ought to shun and avoid.”

A portion of this doctrine in the same session of the Council states:

“If anyone shall say that by faith alone the sinner is justified, so as to understand that nothing else is required to cooperate in the attainment of the grace of justification, and that it is no way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will: let him be anathema.”

The doctrine that works are necessary for justification was also reinforced at the Council of Trent, which stated:

“You see that by works a man is justified and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). (Session 6, chap. 10)

Ignoring past doctrine

The authors of the Joint Declaration wanted to emphasize that the condemnations of the Council of Trent are no longer in force. In fact, the Joint Declaration contains three sections stating exactly this. For example Section 41 of the Joint Declaration says:

  Meeting Finnish Lutherans in January 2012, Benedict praised the accord on justification
“Thus the doctrinal condemnations of the 16th century, that is the Council of Trent, insofar as they are related to the doctrine of justification, appear in a new light: The teaching of the Lutheran churches presented in this declaration does not fall under the condemnations from the Council of Trent.”

While Section 13 of the Joint Declaration states: “In light of this consensus, the corresponding doctrinal condemnations of the 16th century, the Council of Trent, do not apply to today’s partner.”

And Section 5 of the Joint Declaration says: “The present joint declaration does not cover all that either church teaches about justification; it does encompass a consensus on basic truths of the doctrine of justification and shows that the remaining differences are no longer the occasion for doctrinal differences.”

Since Section 26 of the Joint Declaration states, “According to Lutheran understanding, God justifies sinners by faith alone (sola fide), “ it is evident the Joint Declaration implies that sinners are justified by faith alone.

Imposing change on the Catholic Faith

The following three comments from the Joint Declaration expand on the Lutheran doctrine of sola fide.
Section 15 of the Joint Declaration states: “Together we confess that we are accepted by God and we receive the Holy Spirit, who in our hearts, empowers us, and calls us to do good works, not on the basis of our merits but only through grace and faith in the salvific work of Christ.”

Benedict at the Lutheran temple in Rome
Section 5 of the Joint Declaration affirms: “It [the Joint Declaration] does not cover all that either church teaches about justification; it does encompass a consensus on basic truths of the doctrine of justification and shows that the remaining differences in its explication are no longer the occasion for doctrinal condemnations.

A portion of Section 13 of the Declaration says: “By appropriating insights of recent biblical studies and drawing on modern investigations of the History of theology and dogma, the post Vatican II ecumenical dialogue has led to a notable convergence concerning justification, with the result that this Joint Declaration is able to formulate a consensus on basic truths concerning the doctrine of justification. In light of this consensus, the corresponding doctrinal condemnations of the sixteenth century do not apply to today’s partner.”

The subterfuge of “appropriation of insights of recent biblical studies” and “drawing on modern investigations of History, theology and dogma” has frequently been used by modernist conciliar Church theologians to justify their imposition of novelties and changes in the traditional Catholic Faith. This subterfuge is very convenient as it provides a “rationale” for the imposition of continuous change on the traditional Catholic Faith.

Approved by JPII and Ratzinger

It should be noted that neither Pope John Paul II nor then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger signed the declaration; however, neither individual has issued a public denial nor a disclaimer of the Joint Declaration. Moreover, both John Paul II and Cardinal Cassidy, who was the principal negotiator of the pact, have publicly endorsed it, and throughout the entire negotiations the Pope encouraged the process. (2)

In fact, Cardinal Cassidy affirmed that the declaration had been approved by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed by then Cardinal Ratzinger and by John Paul II. (3)

The role of Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, was critical in the obtaining of the declaration as he is credited with “saving” the declaration when it appeared there would be no agreement. (4)

At Castelgandolfo the plan to ask forgiveness from Protestants in 2017 was announced
Protestant theologian Joachim Track listed the three fundamental concessions made by Cardinal Ratzinger that permitted the accord:

“First, he agreed that the goal of the ecumenical process is unity in diversity, not structural reintegration. This was important to many Lutherans in Germany, who worried that the final aim of this was coming back to Rome.

Second, Ratzinger fully acknowledged the authority of the Lutheran World Federation to reach an agreement with the Vatican.

Finally, Ratzinger agreed that while Christians are obliged to do good works, justification and Final Judgement remain God’s gracious acts.” (5)

The anathemas and condemnations of the Council of Trent are still in force since they have not been formally declared invalid by the Pope. The Joint Declaration with the Lutheran sects is another example of a de facto action by Rome that contradicts the Traditional Catholic Faith.

Apud Robert Sungenis, “Review of the Lutheran/Catholic Joint Declaration on Justification”
John Vennari, “Pope John Paul II and the Lutheran Catholic Accord,” The Catholic Family News, July, 1999
Atila S. Guimarães, “The October Revolution,” Tradition in Action
John Allen, “Ratzinger Credited With Saving the Lutheran Pact,” The National Catholic Reporter, October 14, 1999
A.S. Guimarães, “The October Revolution,”
Reply
#2
Unbelievable yes, surprising, no. It's still shocking to hear that high ranking prelates teach that protestants are really members of the Catholic church,I mean, they really do not share the same faith with us at all.next it'll be stated that since there are seeds of the logos even in  Islam, Buddhism and modern atheistic humanism all the men who follow those false religions are really implicit Christians and inside the church even if they don't know it yet...Christ is bigger than the church, in fact he works, justifies and saves those whose religions reject Him, deny Him or h ave no place for Him. All this seems to point to the antichrist who will probably be an anti pope or Catholic prelate that tries to unite that which in reality can't be united...
Reply
#3
(08-14-2013, 12:48 PM)formerbuddhist Wrote: Unbelievable yes, surprising, no. It's still shocking to hear that high ranking prelates teach that protestants are really members of the Catholic church,I mean, they really do not share the same faith with us at all.next it'll be stated that since there are seeds of the logos even in  Islam, Buddhism and modern atheistic humanism all the men who follow those false religions are really implicit Christians and inside the church even if they don't know it yet...Christ is bigger than the church, in fact he works, justifies and saves those whose religions reject Him, deny Him or h ave no place for Him. All this seems to point to the antichrist who will probably be an anti pope or Catholic prelate that tries to unite that which in reality can't be united...

I am losing faith.  I can't take this anymore.
Reply
#4
I don't believe a word that comes out of the mouths of those sedeprivationist lunatics.
Reply
#5
I don't see anything wrong with the quote above. However I do find that there are quite a bit of mental gymnastics being done in order to come to the conclusion, written right below it, as to what he means.
Reply
#6
(08-14-2013, 01:10 PM)Unum Sint Wrote: I don't see anything wrong with the quote above. However I do find that there are quite a bit of mental gymnastics being done in order to come to the conclusion, written right below it, as to what he means.

Could you be more specific about what quote? And what is written right below it? 

Because there's a lot written in the OP.
Reply
#7
Does he mean they are part of the vac ii church or the  REAL catholic .
Reply
#8
There is only ONE real Catholic church. Whether or not snakes entered the church has nothing to do with the validity of the church's authenticity.
Reply
#9
(08-14-2013, 01:13 PM)2Vermont Wrote:
(08-14-2013, 01:10 PM)Unum Sint Wrote: I don't see anything wrong with the quote above. However I do find that there are quite a bit of mental gymnastics being done in order to come to the conclusion, written right below it, as to what he means.

Could you be more specific about what quote? And what is written right below it? 

Because there's a lot written in the OP.

Well thats the problem as I articulate it. From that very small quote the OP seems to make several conclusions that may or may not be correct. However it is the assumption that indeed Muller believes and teaches that prots are full carrying members of the Church without presumption that they must convert.

Now if we look at the quote it self there is nothing theologically wrong with it. It is true from the moment of Baptism a person is part of the Church and as you may know there are several pre conciliar sources that will back that up. At the same time the source that I am thinking of very clearly states that from the moment of Baptism the person is accepted in to God's family (The Church) and at the same time is from that inception and that indelible mark on the souls, bound to the Roman Pontiff. Hence they are able to call them selves (prots) Christians and are not subject to re-baptism at the moment of conversion. At the same time because they do not hear the voice of the Roman Pontiff due to ignorance or other matters they are separated from the Church and are therefore not in union with the Church, which is to me what Archbishop Muller was trying to say.

Simple logic would dictate that this is indeed what he is saying as per our knowledge there is only one Church, the identifying mark of which is Baptism under the formula of the Trinity. Hence if the Baptism is correctly administered then one must conclude that such a person no matter the denomination or the heretical sect are bound to the Roman Pontiff and the one, true Church for there is no other.

Some of the conclusions of the other posters as to what Muller was trying to say is just plain disgusting its almost as bad as the liberals. Now in their defense I will admit I have a dislike for Archbishop Muller and do not believe he should be head of the CDF however having said that, I will not engage in this psedo yellow journalism and simply attached to him my own prejudices about him just because I do not like him.
Reply
#10
Unam Sint I believe your analysis to be putting something in the best light possible, but I don't see how you believe this can be orthodox in any way, shape or form.

“Baptism is the fundamental sign that sacramentally unites us in Christ, and which presents us as the one Church before the world. Thus, we as Catholic and Evangelical Christians are already united even in what we call the visible Church. Strictly speaking, there are not several Churches, one beside the other – rather these are divisions and separations within the one people and house of God.”

Now if he's talking children's ontological status then yes they cannot consent. Here he's clearly talking about the subjective disposition of the baptized person who is clearly NOT part of the Church as he does not mention their ontology previous to reason, but as to the sect they belong to.

You cannot expect me to believe he was referring to the ontological status of infant baptism when he says that Prots are "already united" do you?

Also, different popes at have said the only true title to Christian are Catholics. 

Your argument flies in the face of 2000 years of Catholic theologians that these people are part of the Church.

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)