BREAKING- Pope dismisses Cardinal Müller from CDF

Rorate Caeli ^ | 06-30-2017 | Rorate Caeli

[NRx]

CORRISPONDENZA ROMANA and RORATE CÆLI have just learned that His Eminence Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Faith since July 2, 2012, has been dismissed by Pope Francis on the exact expiry date of his five-year mandate.

Cardinal Müller is one of the cardinals who sought to interpret Amoris Laetitia along the lines of a hermeneutic of continuity with Church Tradition. This was enough to put him among the critics of the new course imposed by Pope Bergoglio.

[piusv]

There are the Norms but there are exceptions. The Catholic Church allows Orthodox to receive communion in the Catholic Church. In extreme, extreme, extreme, situations, lets say natural or military type situation, I do believe a protestant can receive if they ask and profess a faith in the sacrament (correct me if I am wrong).

Prior to Vatican II there were NO EXCEPTIONS. Non-Catholics (and, contrary to popular, post Vatican II belief, Catholics do not include the schismatic Orthodox) were NEVER allowed to receive communion until they CONVERTED.

Having said that, things did change since Vatican II so perhaps all of those who are so up in arms about Francis' latest "exceptions" should recognize that the changes/slippery slope started decades ago. Of course, that doesn't mean that any of the changes were/are consistent with true Catholic teaching. Is it any wonder that Catholics like yourself are falling for the latest heresy? Post-Vatican II Catholics are like frogs in a slow boil.

I've said it a million times before and I'll say it again: the issue isn't (just) Francis.

[CTrent1564]

piusv:

While they may not have been able to do so, there were priests pre-Vatican II, i.e. Feeney who was making claims about Orthodox and Protestants (more outgoing fire towards protestants) and I do believe he was called on the carpet for it. This would have been during the 1940’s.

The Orthodox in terms of not receiving communion, maybe the norms for Communion were different. I use to have My Fathers pre-conciliar Roman Missal, but I don’t know what happen to it. Regardless, the Catholic Church never claimed the Orthodox Sacraments were invalid.

[piusv]

Re: Fr Feeney....what sort of claims? I'm not following you. If you are referring to his belief that there is no Baptism of Desire or Baptism of Blood, that's a different issue. BOD and BOB are Catholic teachings. He was wrong to believe and profess otherwise...and, yes, the Church told him so.

I agree that the Church always claimed that Orthodox sacraments were valid, but that doesn't mean the Catholic Church taught that the Orthodox were part of the Catholic Church. As of 1054, it no longer was and still isn't (despite the new Vatican II ecclesiology).

[CTrent1564]

piusv:

My point was this, Fr. Feeny in essence was saying that all those who were not baptized in the Catholic Church were in effect not baptized and thus doomed to hell, at least, that is the readers digest version of it, as I understand it.

So in some sense, all of those baptized in other Christian traditions were even then somehow related to the Catholic Church. The Orthodox even then more so in that the Catholic Church never denied the validity of their sacraments.

It is related to the Catholic Church and is very close in terms of much theology, and ecclesiology. So if they have valid 7 sacraments, and all the Grace needed for salvation is available in those 7 sacraments then an Orthodox Christian can be saved without being fully in communion with Rome. Is that not correct.

So the case of unbaptized infants is somewhat related to not being in full communion with Rome and only having original sin (nobody, even those formulating Limbo of infants never posited they have personal sin). Original sin in the Catholic Tradition must be removed by God’s Grace, yes you and I agree, and yes, Baptism is the normative means through which God provides Grace and that there are 3 forms of baptism, the Sacrament and Baptism of Desire (BOD) and Baptism of Blood (BOD),

As I noted in another post, the Church of Rome has celebrated the “Feast of the Holy Innocents” during the Christmas Liturgical season sense the 4th century commemorating those boys under 2 years of age that Herod Murdered (c.f. Matt 2:16-18) as martyrs and thus connecting them to the Baptism of Blood (Blood).

So is it not possible that those aborted children, who have souls, can also be saved, possibly, via BOB and seen as Holy Innocents like the children Herod Killed.

Is it also then possible that unbaptized children via the Sacrament in the Church who die before such baptism and not yet at the age of reason can also be saved since it was the parent’s negligence and sin for not having them baptized and they too can be somehow have a received a baptism only known to God since it is also Catholic teaching what while God is bound to His Sacraments, God is Not Bound by them. SInce these children are below the age of reason, God may save them in ways we never can understand and thus they did not die in a state of original sin.