CARD.MULLER SURPRISES.’ VATICAN COUNCIL II (RATIONAL) IS ALIGNED WITH AQUINAS’ : PLUG IN FOR RAD TRADS, ROMAN MISSAL AND LATIN MASS.
CARD.MULLER SURPRISES.’ VATICAN COUNCIL II (RATIONAL) IS ALIGNED WITH AQUINAS’ : PLUG IN FOR RAD TRADS, ROMAN MISSAL AND LATIN MASS.
German Cardinal Gerhard Muller sent a bolt from the blue. In a surprise-statement he said Vatican Council II is aligned with St. Thomas Aquinas ! Catholic theology trembles, as if, there is a blast on the boat.
In a plug-in for rad trads, the Roman Missal and the Latin Mass, Muller said the unsayable, when interviewed by Bishop Robert Barron.
He has come out with ‘the expected truth’ we were waiting for from Cardinal Robert Sarah.
Now leading the conservative cardinals, he is correct, the Council is no more a break with St. Thomas Aquinas and his time. Muller has broken stereotypes of the Council being ‘a revolution’ and ‘a new revelation’.
In the past he has always interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally and so it has come as a welcome-surprise when he said the Council is in line with the Scholastic period. This is not Pope Francis’s schismatic interpretation. It is funeral chimes for 60 years of liberalism. Nostra Aetate does not contradict Ad Gentes .
Aquinas held the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and we now know that being saved in invincible ignorance is not an objective exception for EENS.Aquinas’ ‘man in the forest’ is hypothetical and does not contradict EENS.
Muller seems to be interpreting Vatican Council II rationally, for it to be aligned with Aquinas, and this is a break with Bishop Robert Barron. Barron continues to interpret Vatican Council II irrationally. So LG 16 is a visible exception for the dogma EENS for him in 2025.This is why he told the Jew, Ben Shapiro that he did not have to convert into the Catholic Church for salvation. Like the irrational Balthazar, Barron says that we can have a reasonable hope that most people are saved. This is the fruit of Cushingism.Cushingite reasoning is heretical and schismatic irrespective of who uses it.
But Muller is now Feeneyite and not Cushingite on EENS.
When what is invisible (LG 16 for example) is confused as being visible, I call it Cushingism.
When what is invisible (LG 14, LG 16 etc) is seen as just being invisible, I call it Feeneyism.
This must not be confused with Wikipedia’s ‘Feeneyism’, which really is Cushingism.
For Cardinal Muller LG 14 and 16 refer to a hypothetical case for Vatican Council II to be aligned with St. Thomas Aquinas.
Muller and Barron both endorse Vatican Council II in the interview but it is clear that Muller’s concept of the Council is no more liberal like that of Barron.
Aquinas was ecclesiocentric as the Roman Missal and we can say also of Vatican Council II, too, the Council, rational, is in harmony with Aquinas and Augustine on EENS.
VATICAN COUNCIL II IS FEENEYITE
Vatican Council II is Feeneyite for him. Rad-trad.
Muller says the Council is aligned with Aquinas indicating that he now interprets Vatican Council II rationally.It is a break from his past and the interpretation of the International Theological Commission, of which he was a member as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
He is now telling us that he does not accept the Council like Cardinal Kasper, Bishop Barron, Archbishop Lefebvre and Pope Benedict. For them ‘there was a development of dogma’, the dogma EENS had exceptions.This was Vatican Council II, irrational.Rahner accepted it and Lefebvre rejected it but both used the false premise (invisible people are visible).
Muller has come out with a bombshell statement. He indicates that the Council has a continuity with Tradition.It is not schismatic as Pope Leo would have it.
The German cardinal has gone rad-trad indicating all the way; suggesting, that the interpretation of cardinals Hollerich and Grech and the Synods, schismatically, is obsolete. We now have a rational and traditional choice.
It means the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II by the Consistory which gave us Amoris Laetitia is now obsolete. The Council has moved forward. It is traditional. So there cannot be changes in faith, morals and liturgy in the name of Vatican Council II (irrational) any more.
There is no change in the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Creeds, Councils and Catechisms.
So when Cardinal Muller says Vatican Council II is aligned with Aquinas he is saying that he affirms Vatican Council II interpreted only rationally ( LG 16 is invisible in 2025) and so the Council is ecclesiocentric ( Ad Gentes 7) like the Roman Missal and the Council of Florence 1442.
BREAK WITH POPE LEO
In a subtle and explosive statement he seems to break away with Pope Leo’s concept of Vatican Council II and general Ratzingerian theology when he said, surprisingly, Vatican Council II is aligned with St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church. It has a continuity with Tradition. It is not schismatic. He has put aside the common Rahner-Ratzinger-Lefebvre, new theology which confuses what is implicit as being explicit. This is the error which comes from the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston.
So the ball is back in Bishop Barron’s court. Is he still saying that LG 14 and 16 refer to visible cases of salvation outside the Catholic Church and so contradict Aquinas’ concept of exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church ?- Lionel Andrades