Editor’s Note: Cardinal Gerhard Müller appeared on EWTN’s The World Over with Raymond Arroyo on Oct. 6. Please find the interview transcript below, edited for length and clarity.
Your Eminence, thank you for being here. The last two years, the Church has been polling Catholics all over the world, and non-Catholics we might add, about their desires in the Church and from the Church. Now, these national reports have been sent to Rome. Internationally, an average of 1% to 10% of baptized Catholics have really taken part in these synodal discussion groups, for such a small representative group. Do these national surveys mean very much? Do they actually reflect what Catholics are most concerned about?
I think the approach is wrong. … We have to listen to the word of God. And then to put it into practice. …
The concerns of these reports are curious. In England, Ireland, France and others, they cite the need for a more welcoming Church, your Eminence. In particular, the synthesis identifies the “LGBTQ” community, divorced Catholics, women in the Church. Regarding the “LGBTQ“ community, the U.S. report states the following: “The hope for a welcoming Church expressed itself clearly with the desire to accompany, with authenticity, LGBTQ+ persons in their families. In order to be a more welcoming Church, there’s a deep need for ongoing discernment of the whole Church on how to best accompany our LGBTQ+ brothers and sisters.” What do you make of this focus on the “LGBTQ” community? And how do you see the evolving synod taking up those concerns?
These reports, they all seem to tend in a direction of stronger leadership and more presence in decision-making for women. The Australians specifically request an ongoing discussion about the ordination of women and deacons. Now, hasn’t this question of female ordination been settled by the last several pontificates, including Pope Francis?
… In the Church, we have nothing to do with political power, and to self-representation, but we have to follow the will of God and to be responsible for the salvation of all mankind; and we have to cooperate with the will of God. We have the mission of Jesus Christ, to lead everybody towards a salvation, to Jesus Christ, who is the only Redeemer, not to self-creation, to self-redemption. It’s all manipulated [these ideas], of ideology, and that has nothing to do with the Gospel and the doctrine of the Catholic Church
You were head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. What must you think as you watch a system being created, where all of that doctrine seems to be up for grabs?
The basis of the Church is the word of God as a revelation … not our strange reflections. … This [agenda] is a system of self-revelation. This occupation of the Catholic Church is a hostile takeover of the Church of Jesus Christ…. And if you look at only one page, or read one page of the Gospel, you’ll see that it has nothing to do with Jesus Christ … and [in this agenda] they think that doctrine is only like a program of a political party, who can change it according to their votes….
I have to say, I am, I am shaken when I hear you say, and you were just at a consistory, which we’ll talk about in a moment, that you believe the synodal process is … shaping up into a hostile takeover of the Church, of an attempt to destroy the Church. Is that what you see here?
If they succeed, it will be the end of the Catholic Church. And we must resist it like the old heretics of the Arianism. When Arias thought, according to his ideas, what can God do and what can God not do? And it is irrationalism: human, the intellect to decide what is true and what is wrong.
All these national reports are being synthesized into a working document, known in Rome, as the instrumentum laborious. This document continues to be refined, but, ultimately, it will guide all these discussions for the synod in Rome. This is being drafted by the synod leadership and advisory committee and a group of approximately 20 so-called experts. These are laypeople, religious sisters, Catholic priests, an archbishop. Who are the these people, and why have they been chosen to put this working document together? Why not a group of cardinals to do this?
They are dreaming of another church that has nothing to do with the Catholic faith … and they want to abuse this process, for shifting the Catholic Church — and not only in other direction, but in the destruction of the Catholic Church. … Nobody can make an absolute shift and substitute the revealed doctrine of the Church, but they have these strange ideas, as doctrine as only a theory of some theologians….
The above comes from an Oct. 7 posting on the site of the National Catholic Register.
“If they succeed, it will be the end of the Catholic Church”
If that is the end of the Catholic Church, then the only conclusion the cardinal can be arriving at is the Second Coming of Christ. He who said “I will be with you until the end of the age and the gates of Hell will not prevail against (the Church). Possible but very unlikely in our lifetime as it has been predicted more times than can be counted yet here we are, again, saying the gates of Hell are sure to prevail making Christ a fibber?
I’m on this cardinal’s side but I do wish he’d not let his fear get in the way of total and radical trust in Christ Jesus. It’s most unbecoming of him.
Watch the interview. Don’t jump to any ultimate theological conclusions. What the Cardinal said, very simply– was true. And who are the true Catholics? The true followers of Jesus Christ? Many in the Vatican today– are imposters. The True Church continues, even wirh many unknown Saints, perhaps hidden– among Christ’s true followers, until the end of time, and the Second Coming of Christ.
In pre-Vatican II days, heretics were silenced, and most were excommunicated. The Catholic Faith was strictly guarded. And long ago, heretic Martin Luther barely escaped being burned at the stake. Today, in the post-Conciliar era, the Catholic Church has adopted a totally new viewpoint and policy on heresies. Imagine clerics of the “Lavendar Mafia” thriving in the eras of Pope Pius XI and XII! No way! And I bet even Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict would not accept Fr. James Martin, S.J., and his heretical, immoral “LGBT apostolate.”
What a shame that the Synod on Synodality’s Relator General, or top leader, Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, is a supporter of gay sex and gay “marriage,” and previously stated that the Catechism is “out-of- date” and “wrong” on sexuality teachings, and should be changed to accept gay sex acts and gay “marriage!” Recently, Hollerich was strongly persuaded to walk back his beliefs, and he did so– but stated that the Synod should “listen” to the LGBTs and their sufferings, and lack of being “welcome” in the Church. He is a very poor Church leader, along with many others in the Vatican’s “Lavendar Mafia.” What a shame. Where is promotion of the excellent, faithful Catholic LGBT group, “Courage?”
Please stop lying.
But he is not lying…you are denying the truth
Nobody is lying. Watch the EWTN show and see the truth for yourself. People lie when they sin– and then say that they actually believe in sinning– that’s lying and heresy. This old world has always had a lot of corruption and sin. Christ foretold that there would someday be wolves dressed in sheep’s clothing— dangerous, deceptive, false Christian leaders. Judas was Christ’s first false disciple, who betrayed Him to be killed– for money. The Devil is always on the prowl, looking for souls to snatch. Don’t let the Devil trick you and snatch your soul– we must always be on guard, against the Evil One.
Anytime someone is challenged to support those lies they can never produce anything.
We do not need to go back over it again.
People need to remember that bearing false witness is a mortal sin.
You don’t seem to have any idea of what Cardinal Muller was talking about. Watch the show.
I say, “asdf’s” interpretation of the interview seems closer to accuracy than those of the other commenters here. The other commenters (some of whom seem to have no real love for the Church nor a deep faith) were just so willing to exaggerate the Cardinal’s apprehensions. Where the Cardinal seems to say, “I fear this may happen,” those who lack faith and who dislike the Church would say, “Yep folks, it’s gonna happen.”
So you say you would follow any old possible “wolf” in sheep’s clothing, with no proper discernment– McCarrick, Hollerich, German bishops, and the filthy, heretical Abp. Paglia, false head of the Pontifical Academy for Life and JPII Pontifical Theological Institute for Marriage and Family Life Sciences… What kind of “Christian” is that?
We follow Jesus Christ. Any of the merely humans can err. If you know Christ, you don’t follow error. But you also just pray for those in error. We need to pray for all of them and for ourselves.
As usual, Cardinal Mueller is right. God bless him. And I do not believe he has any real fear of the gates of hell prevailing against the Church, he just knows that that is what some people are trying to do.
I seemed to have misspelled the Cardinal’s name, which is Muller with an accent over the “u” which my computer does not have. I think a few people have spelled it “Mueller” because they do not have that key either. Anyway, I shall correct my spelling.
jon worships the hierarchy, he ignores their crimes and attacks the Faithful who call them out… And he will defend their crimes..
Sorry, just for the record folks, but “bohemond” is wrong. I only worship the God Who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And no, I have not “ignored” nor defended the crimes of anyone (lay or clerics). HOWEVER, I have called out commenters here who use the clerical scandal as an excuse to disobey, deride, and dismiss the Magisterium’s teachings in matters of faith, morals, and discipline. I have called out commenters here who have been unjust, uncharitable, and erroneous in their criticisms of the Church and her teachings. I have called out “bohemond” for expressing what can be interpreted as wanting to inflict harm on a Catholic priest. Shameful.
I’m not sure you read it as his words were not in fear but in an advisory manner, George most likely wrote this in an Australian prison, removed from his post due to his sharp book keeping skills. It is ironic that his time in prison accused of crime he did not commit afforded him the insight to clarify the extent of entropy that has ravaged the Church. Crisis and victory, this memo is a testament to the unwavering determination of a true Cardinal and will be the document that finds the next Pontiff who will restore the church. God bless Cardinal Pell.
This show was excellent. I greatly appreciated the interview with Cardinal Muller. Will watch the re-run of this show this evening, at 7pm California time.
The Pope video for this month on the Apostleship of Prayer website explains better what synod is.
The Synod is garbage….any everyone knows it the goal is to change the Church to the will of the Elites..
When I look at what has become of the JP II institute and the other aspects of this pontificate, it seems to me that if the Catholic Church is in fact beginning to follow the lead of the Anglicans, that process began in 2015, and if Francis has consolidated his power/influence sufficiently, the process will continue long after I am gone from this earth. I mean no criticism here; in fact the only criticism I might have is whether or not my observation has any merit or not. If it has none then so be it. It is not possible for us to see the end from the beginning has God can. I might add, contra asdf, that I do not think Cardinal Muller is being fearful, and it is indeed most becoming for him, as a prince of the Church, to use his good judgment to criticize the synodal process if and where criticism is due.
I am surprised that a Cardinal in the Catholic Church does not understand the synod.
It is not about changing the Church’s teaching.
You cannot be in synod if you are not in communion.
Are there some who want to use this as an opportunity to change things that they do not like in the church?
Yes. So what?
The Pope himself has said that this is to listen to the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is not going to change revelation.
“I am surprised that a Cardinal in the Catholic Church does not understand the synod…” Rather, because he does understand how THIS synodal process is going, that he gives voice to the deep concerns above. There are plenty of influential voices who do expect the Holy Spirit to change revelation. Since his expression is public and combative, I feel C. Muller is adding his voice to THIS synodal process in a manner calculated to have the greatest impact.
That is not how the synod works.
And just who is actually listening to the Holy Spirit? You? Me? Your priest at church? Your mom or grandma praying the Rosary at home? The pope? Former “Cardinal” McCarrick, McElroy, Cupich, Hollerich, the pro-gay German bishops… how about the Charismatics, who claim to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit? Many who say that they hear the Voice of the Holy Spirit– may next turn around, and actually rebel, and refuse to obey Him– with plenty of lies and excuses…. To hear and willingly obey the Lord, is not always easy– it takes a great deal of spiritual maturity. The saints will all tell you that, for sure.
We are all supposed to be.
I know some will be upset with the Cardinal over his honest, even frank, remarks about the state of the Church. Yet, I listened to the entire interview and wondered, “Is there anything he said that is not true?”
And, I mean that as a sincere, not only rhetorical, question. If any readers here think he said something untrue, please share it. Thank you.
The end of the Catholic Church began with the advent of Vatican II.
Mister Humble, the Catholic Church will continue until the Lord returns.
And, the arrival of the Second Vatican Council changed what, precisely?
Many bad things happened subsequent to the Council,but that’s another issue.
Nobody cares about truth. Except me.
I couldn’t agree more. Nobody cares about truth. Except me. And, maybe myself.
I’m glad you alone care. If I ever awaken from my moral and intellectual slumbers, I shall give you a call.
If anyone cares, the current month’s Pope Video helps illuminate where some of the confusion started.
This just did not translate well at all.
In English, the word “synod” means a meeting. The Pope defines it as a journey together.
The preparatory document was mind-scrambling and I don’t think any diocese in the US did what they were supposed to do.
There were attempts at it but when you see the syntheses, most of them do not address the issues that they were supposed to address.
The Pope says in his video that this is not about gathering opinions or holding a Parliament (that does not translate either). It is not about taking surveys.
But that is what the US diocese did.
If everybody who freaked out that the bogeymen were trying to change church teaching had taken this more seriously, maybe it would have helped.
But they got distracted by their anxieties or their need for clickbait, that this has totally failed.
Cardinal Mueller states two important things: the synod has no power to change doctrine.
and in commenting on the controversial picture that said young people want to make decisions in the Church: they want to take over a power that does not exist.
Once doctrine becomes a popularity contest, the end of the Catholic Church is definitely here. Catholicism rested on the authority of the hierarchy, not the “ground-up” decisions of the people. The Church has never been, was not meant to be, nor should it be a “democratic” body. If the pope wants democratic Protestantism, he should resign and join the Lutherans. In addition, Vatican 2 took the mystery and awe out of the Church, and they cannot put that genie back in the bottle.
Doctrine is not a popularity contest.
The Catholic Church will end at the eschaton.
Catholicism rests on the revelation of the Holy Trinity and the Saving Grace of the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross.
The Pope is not trying to create a democracy or a Protestant Church.
I cannot speak as to your lack of sense of mystery and awe but It may be that you are in a period of dryness.
No, Janet is not in a period of “dryness.” The post-Conciliar Church focuses more on the community of lay people and humanism, in this world– and less on God in Heaven, and His great grandeur, awesome glory, mystery, celestial beauty, and transcendence, far beyond this world. The New Mass– Novus Ordo Missae– reflects this change of focus. The Church has changed radically in some ways, rendering it almost unrecognizable at times– as it has shed many Catholic characteristics. We used to have a very definite, very strong Catholic identity. Many traditional Catholic elements have been sacrificed for the goal of ecumenism. Regardless, Christ is with us to the very end.
Where do you get this stuff?
Elderly Catholics have lived through it all. Quite a struggle for many, raising kids, sending them to Catholic schools and universities, in the post-Conciliar confusion and chaos. Maybe you had similar struggles.
I did have similar struggles but the Church not the Council was at fault. It was persons who were making decisions. Usually lay persons which if you let the pastor know he usually took care of the problem.
You do have to get involved at a local level to see where the root is. Sometimes, it is a priest or a nun but usually somebody just read a book or attended a conference, and they actually believe that they are doing the right thing.
It doesn’t matter “who is at fault,” the post-Conciliar era has just been a big mess, that’s all. There is a lack of discipline. Informing your pastor or the bishop of serious issues, may not help at all. They may actually ignore you, and also, they may be very, very “liberal,” and against your beliefs and concerns. Whom did they hire to teach at your parish grade school or high school? Whom did they put in charge of the parish youth group? In one terrible case, I know of a group of parents who kept telling their priests and their bishop, that a Catholic high school teacher who also led a youth group, was sexually harassing and having affairs with teens. Even when two Catholic teenage girls got pregnant by him, the parents were simply ignored. It took several years of strong parental pressure and demands, but they finally succeeded in getting their priests and bishop to listen to them, and found a way to get the bad “Catholic” teacher fired. In the post-Conciliar era, not many Catholic parents are successful, in these types of situations.
It doesn’t matter “who is at fault,” the post-Conciliar era has just been a big mess, that’s all. There is a lack of discipline. Informing your pastor or the bishop of serious issues, may not help at all. They may actually ignore you, and also, they may be very, very “liberal,” and against your beliefs and concerns. Whom did they hire to teach at your parish grade school or high school? Whom did they put in charge of the parish youth group? In one terrible case, I knew of a group of parents, in the 1970s, who kept telling their priests and their bishop, that a Catholic high school teacher who also led a youth group, was sexually harassing and having affairs with teens. Even when two Catholic teenage girls got pregnant by him, the parents were simply ignored. It took several years of strong parental pressure and demands, but they finally succeeded in getting their priests and bishop to listen to them, and found a way to get the bad “Catholic” teacher fired. In the post-Conciliar era, not many Catholic parents are successful, in these types of situations.
All about how the Church has “lost its way.” No it hasn’t. It’s the adherents of the religion called “traditionalism” that has gone astray.
No. All about how some influential Church leaders have sinned grievously, at the Synod on Synodality– and Cardinal Muller has called them out on this. Some have publicly stated heretical beliefs in grave sin, such as gay sex acts and gay “marriage,” preaching that the Catechism is “wrong,” on teachings about the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony.
The Synod on Synodality has not even happened yet.
Jon, may I suggest you take on C. Muller’s criticisms of the synodal practice and refute them, showing how he is either misinformed, ill-informed, or illogical. Failing to do that, you must either suspend judgment or agree with him. I say this because the apostle of sanity, Deacon Craig Anderson, has written: “Yet, I listened to the entire interview and wondered, “Is there anything he said that is not true?”” And D. Craig is not talking about Traditionalists corrupting the process, but with C. Muller, progressives– those who presumably have the pope’s ear. Said another way, there are progressives in the Church that have lost their way, and gone astray. And recently, on Oct 11, P. Francis decried both progressive excesses and Traditionalists, so we may infer that he is not blind to C.Muller’s concerns. His actions, however, are overwhelmingly favorable toward the progressives, while hostile to Trads. Make of that what you will.
I have never seen a member of clergy state heretical beliefs that was not disciplined.
Never seen one say gay sex acts are not sins or that gay marriage is possible.
Never seen anyone say that the Catechism is wrong on anything.
No one has stated any change in the sacrament of Holy Matrimony.
Let me guess what you are actually referring to. Saying that the Catechism should be changed does not mean they are going to change catholic teaching. They may be clarifying or firming up some teaching like on capital punishment.
One country has initiated a blessing ceremony for gay couples. It is not a marriage. I think it is poorly thought out but it is not about gay sex.
Ambiguity is complained about and I think that is a legitimate complaint.
So “Dan.” I don’t disagree with the Cardinal; I disagree with those Catholics who seem to have a weak faith as well as the detractors of the Church who would spin Muller’s words by blowing up the Cardinal’s apprehensions, making them the reality, spinning them to attack the Holy Father and the rest of the Magisterium.
cd, better stay informed! Many German bishops, and Cardinal Hollerich, the Synod’s relator general, as well as some other Northern European bishops, have proclaimed the Catechism to be “wrong” and “out-of-date” on Marriage and sexuality, and want to “update” the Catechism to include gay sex acts and gay “marrriage.” Some prelates are now offering formal blessings of gay unions and gay “marriages,” in their churches and cathedrals. Fr. James Martin, S.J., a gay promoter, is a favorite of the Pope. Sr. Jeannie Grammick, promoter of the LGBT agenda with her New Ways Ministry, formerly censored in previous papal eras, is now welcomed by the Pope and his current Synod. In the Vatican II era, and especially in Pope Francis’ pontificate, heretics and immoral clergy, nuns and laymen are almost never called out or disciplined. The pope has also stated his desire that bad Catholic pro-abortion political leaders, like Pelosi and Biden, never be denied Communion. This is contrary to our Faith, and to our Code of Canon Law, which today’s Pope and Vatican do not always follow, nor agree with.
That the Pope and the Holy See do not follow the Canon Laws of the Church. Appalling. Appalling because it is false, unjust, scandalous, and wrong on all levels.
Honestly speaking, jon, if you have followed this pope at all– you will know that he has repeatedly complained that he “does not like the rules,” and “wants to bend the rules,” to accommodate certain situations. Since Vatican II, the popes as well as a great many priests and prelates do not accept nor follow all of Canon Law. Especially, on Communion! Canon 915 of Pope St. John Paul II’s Revised Code of Canon Law, is frequently ignored and disregarded, by many prelates, and by Pope Francis — and they do not consider themselves as “heretical” nor “scandalous.” Contrary to Canon Law– Pope Francis and top Vatican prelates pressured our USCCB not to deny Comminion to pro abort “Catholic” politicians, Biden and Pelosi. After he was first elected, Pope Francis encouraged several Latin Americans to take Communion– even if they were in such situations as: divorced without a Church annulment, divorced without an annulment and remarried, married in only a civil ceremony, unwed and just “shacking up,” etc. They told him that he was wrong, and their parish priests agreed, that the pope was wrong– such things are sinful, against Church teaching and Canon Law.
The Holy Father is on record for saying that when determining if a politician should be denied Holy Communion, bishops and priests must be “pastors” first, not politicians. And for Pope Francis to say this is not a violation of Canon Law, but a prudential and pastoral application of it.
Please provide links to your claims (and please make sure that the links actually contain the claims you are referring to.
Read the Bible. Pray the Rosary.
The Internet contains many temptations.
Get a good examination of conscience, which also can be found on the Internet.
Thst is true, what you said about Pope Francis and his views on Canon Law. Many prelates, however, do not agree with his views. Our Archbishop has denied Communion to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, after trying to apply pastoral principles– which she obstinately repeatedly rejected. She does not obey her Archbishop, she does as she pleases, stating that in her view, Vatican II means the Catholic individual makes up his or her own mind– and no Church authority can tell you what to do.
The Archbishop of SF does not disagree with Pope Francis. In fact the Archbishop obeyed and applied Pope Francis’ admonition to be “pastors first” not politicians. He reached out to Pelosi several times without a positive response. Therefore Cordileone sought to be the “pastor” to Pelosi who refused her Archbishop’s attempts. And to our knowledge the Pope has not called out the Archbishop nor reprimanded him.
Religious traditions, the way you actually worship God and live your religious faith, is very important. Of course, religious abuses– such as with the Biblical Pharisees — are always wrong. Jesus Christ was born into a devout, traditional Jewish family– the culmination of the ancient Jewish prophecy of the Messiah, the descendant of King David. Jesus was circumcised in a religious ceremony by the Rabbi, 8 days after His birth. The famous “Last Supper” was at the Jewish Passover; the Seder Meal was the traditional Passover dinner, cooked and eaten in a sacred, traditional way. One must always deeply value and respect one’s religious traditions. When Catholics enter a church, we dip our fingers in holy water, and make the Sign of the Cross—- and genuflect in respect to the Blessed Sacrament. Some might kneel and say the Rosary before Mass. Those are three examples of our religious Tradition. “Modernization” of religious traditions usually ends up secularizing a religious people, robbing them of their ancient religious practices, entire historical treasure, way of life, and identity. Cultural and religious “modernizations” and “revolutions” usually become lethal, destroying entire cultures and religions– not “improving” or “purifying” them, as some revolutionary leaders hope to do. Sacred Tradition is one of the three pillars of our Deposit of Faith. The other two pillars are Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium.
You overlook an important point: that it is the Magisterium (that is, the Pope and the bishops united with him) that hands down to the Church what the authentic Tradition is. They are the only authentic guardians of Tradition (“Traditionis custodes” folks). It is not up to individual Catholics, not up to a rogue Bishop (such as Lefebvre), nor is it up to “traditionalist” groups that determine what the authentic Tradition (and traditions) of the Church is. The Magisterium handed down to the Church at the Second Vatican Council a form of the Mass that contains the Tradition that it wants the Church to observe.
Of course, jon. But you fail to mention that the Catholic Faith has a gigantic, rich, and holy Tradition that goes back 2000+ years in history. Whether you “like” it ir not– our Sacred Tradition is actually many, many centuries old, quite ancient. The current pope has indicated that he does not “like” or “accept” all of it. But it happens to be there, anyway. It exists.
It is still the Magisterium (the Pope and the bishops united with him) that ultimately determines which aspects of the “gigantic, rich, and holy” Tradition and traditions should be handed down, emphasized, focused on, and promoted. And those who reject the authority and the decisions of the Magisterium on this point fall into the error of “traditionalism.”
I think each of the Bishops/Archbishops who are diocesan/archdiocese heads determine for their own people how to best handle the great, long historical legacy of Catholic Tradition, and what is to be valued, focused on, promoted, and handed down. All of our Tradition is there, and exists. Even non-Catholic historians and great leaders and experts in many professional fields, have it all to examine, and it all gets passed down, anyway — like it ir not. It is there for all the world to see and examine. Future generations will make their own decisions with it all.
“Reply’s” comment is very wrong. It is very wrong because it negates the unity and “catholicity” (that’s “universality” for you un-catechized out there) inherent in the Church. It is the Magisterium that decides for the Church universal what is to be the tradition to be handed down, promoted, focused upon. The Church moves “together”, in unity. It is not up to individual bishops to decide on their own. A rogue bishop acting on his own, deciding for himself and his territory which “traditions” to observe which is contrary to the decisions of the rest of the Magisterium, is not union with the Pope and the rest of the Church. Think of the excommunicate Lefebvre, a rogue bishop whose minions (that’s the beloved SSPX for you newcomers out there) continue to deceive Catholics, peddling to them their own “tradition” in defiance of the Magisterium. The consequence of their defiance: they have no legal ministry in the Church apart from that which Pope Francis has allowed.
It simply doesn’t matter. The whole 2000+ years of Catholic Tradition is there, for all to see. Long after you and your young, “know-it-all” generation are gone from this earth, new Catholics, new Catholic theologians, priests, prelates and popes– not even born yet– will have their own ideas and opinions on Catholic Tradition, in perhaps even a totally different Church and society, from what exists, today. Nobody’s interested in your views. Sorry.
“Reply” writes: “Nobody is interested in your views.” Where is the Christian charity in such a comment? Such an attitude negates whatever lofty words you have to say about “tradition”, if you don’t even care what your brothers and sisters are saying. I say this: there are many “traditions” that had been present in the Church in her 2,000 year history, and believe you me, not all of them you would want to bring back. For example, in times pasts, priests, bishops, and popes owned slaves. Nobody here, and I daresay neither do you, would want to bring that “tradition” back.
The Catechism entries for Tradition and Magisterium are 74-95.
“jon” asks, “Where is the Christian charity in such a comment?” — yet he/she is repeatedly contemptuous and sneering of others’ opinions. He calls faithful people here “unjust and irrational, and worse. I can only describe it as a bully/provocateur who instigates trouble yet cries victim when called out. I wonder how the moderator of this site can allow “jon’s” vituperations while many responses to “jon” are edited out.
Remarks from “charitable, loving jon” on “Christian charity” are a huge horse laugh!
The fact that my comments appear here as they are means that they are neither “bullying” or “provocative” as “Axiom” wrongly claims; it means my comments have cleared the moderators and editors of this here blog, and that my comments are totally acceptable. However, the fact that “Axiom” does not find some of her own comments here means that the editors may have found her comments unacceptable for whatever reason, or even “bullying”. This blog has editors and moderators who have the thankless task of reading comments and of sifting out the bad ones. They get my thumbs up, people.
Reply to jon, you do not seem to understand what the Catholic Church means by Tradition. Apostolic tradition is from the same source as the Bible-God. It is a source of revelation. it is part of the deposit of faith.
The Pope accepts all of it.
There are not 2000 years of Tradition. Nothing can be added to the deposit of faith just as nothing can be added to the Bible.
Your ideas are very heretical although I am sure that you do not mean them to be.
No, me. Catholic Tradition contains 2000+ years of Christian religious practices– handed down in a rich oral tradition. In Jesus’ day, most people could not read and write– but learned their religion and devotional practices by heart, orally. Christ never wrote a book. In His day, religious teachings and practices were mainly taught orally. Those who could read and write, read the Jewish Torah, and other religious works. It was not until the early 20th century, that vast populations were educated. Traditions like the Rosary came directly from Our Lady to St. Dominic. Other religious traditions– making the the Sign of the Cross, wearing a Scapular or holy medal, Lent and Advent practices, Friday abstinence, Lenten ashes, etc. etc. — may not be found in the Bible, but are a part of our Tradition. The Pope may decide to dump a tradition, such as Friday abstinence (we now only have Lenten Friday abstinence, along with fast/abstinence on Ash Wed. and Good Fri.) — but it is still a good religious practice, that anyone can do, outside of Lent. The three pillars of the Deposit of Faith are Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium.
Of the three pillars, Scripture is the “norma normans” of the faith (that’s Latin for the “ruling rule” for you non-Latinists out there). This means that if there’s anything in the Tradition or in Magisterial teaching that contradicts Holy Scripture, it is to be discarded, abandoned: because Scripture is the “norma normans” of the faith. Point of fact, the words “mysterium fidei” which still appears in the Institution Narrative in the Canon of the Mass of John XXIII (that’s the TLM for you Protestants out there) is an egregious contradiction of the witness of Scripture because none of the Gospels record Our Lord saying “mysterium fidei” at the Last Supper (and the priest is meant to quote the words of Jesus at the Last Supper during that part of the Canon). Therefore, the reform the liturgy called for at the Second Vatican Council was very necessary in order to reform, among other things, this egregious addition of the words “mysterium fidei”. That is an example of the Magisterium making a rightful and necessary decision to drop and abandon an aspect of the Church’s tradition.
CCC 83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.
Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium.
Exactly. “from’s” quote of the Catechism validates my point. It is the Magisterium (#83) that ultimately decides which aspects of tradition (note the lower case people) are to be handed-down or to be abandoned. So, “me”, you’re mistaken. I understand completely the distinction between the Sacred Tradition of the Church and the various local and ecclesiastical traditions, which can be abandoned. For example, folks like the beloved SSPX are bent on retaining “traditions” that the most recent Ecumenical Council (the highest form of legislation in the Church, people) has decided to be set aside by the entire Church. Because they stubbornly refuse, they are not in full communion with the rest of the Church. This is why “Reply to’s’ comment earlier which negates the Church’s catholicity and universality is very wrong.
Thank God for Cardinal Müller.