{"id":18278,"date":"2020-05-01T15:59:38","date_gmt":"2020-05-01T12:59:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/?p=18278"},"modified":"2020-05-01T16:12:18","modified_gmt":"2020-05-01T13:12:18","slug":"cardinal-muller-is-a-heretic-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/cardinal-muller-is-a-heretic-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Cardinal M\u00fcller is a heretic \/Part 2\/"},"content":{"rendered":"
20 April 2020<\/strong><\/em><\/h5>\n

\"\"<\/a>Ad B) Quotes and responses to M\u00fcller\u2019s statements in his book \u201cCatholic Dogmatics\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

Cardinal M\u00fcller, who is regarded as strongly conservative today, wrote a textbook of dogmatics, which definitely is not conservative, at a time when he was not yet a bishop. The book was published in 1995 under the title of Katholische Dogmatik: F\u00fcr Studium und Praxis der Theologie.<\/em> Thereafter, it was published in many editions and translations and is still used for theological studies. Here, in Chapter 5, Section 3, M\u00fcller speaks about the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ in the sense of completely rejecting and denying it. Card. M\u00fcller has never repented of his heresies.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Quote:<\/strong> \u201cGiven that the synoptics cannot and do not want to record the Easter event in a graphic scenario, but rather testify to the revelatory event which is accessible only through faith…\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Response:<\/strong> To claim that \u201cthe revelatory event\u201d<\/em> of Christ after His resurrection was accessible only through faith<\/em> is a lie. The apostles believed neither women nor even when Christ Himself appeared to them. So He ate in their presence and encouraged them to touch Him. Thomas did not believe the apostles for a whole week until he himself put his finger into the wounds of Christ. Therefore, to say that \u201cthe revelatory event (of Christ) is accessible only through faith\u201d<\/em> is completely at odds with reality. On the contrary, the unbelieving apostles faced the reality of the Risen Christ and spread this truth of our salvation as witnesses throughout the world.<\/p>\n

If M\u00fcller claims that the Evangelists cannot record<\/em> Christ\u2019s resurrection graphically, he thus also claims that the Gospels do not give real facts but only their fictional reflections. He thus denies the veracity of the Gospels. If, as he goes on to say, they do not<\/em> even want<\/em> to record<\/em> the facts, then what does M\u00fcller consider the Gospels to be? A pack of lies or myths?<\/p>\n

M\u00fcller thus says that the apostles did not witness a real event \u2013 in other words, that they did not really encounter the Risen Lord. He degrades them to a kind of visionaries. This is M\u00fcller\u2019s gross manipulation and deception. It is a heresy of relativism and modernism. M\u00fcller does not believe that Christ rose in the flesh. The Christian faith as presented by him has lost its meaning because he represents it in such a way that it has nothing to do with facts. According to his heretical conception, faith is only an inner subjective experience, independent of reality.<\/p>\n

Quote:<\/strong> \u201cThe literary character of the Synoptic Easter Gospels must be taken into account. They do not want to be <\/em>a protocol-like account <\/u><\/em>of an externally imperceptible event<\/u><\/em> by the witnesses involved.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Response:<\/strong> The fact that the testimonies of the individual witnesses \u2013 Evangelists \u2013 are no protocol-like accounts<\/u> does not change the reality of the resurrection. From their statements, we can create a protocol-like account using the same method as the examining magistrates do. From the findings and witness statements, we will compile a reliable picture of what and how happened in connection with Christ\u2019s resurrection. This is what honest theologians actually do.<\/p>\n

M\u00fcller uses an expression \u201can externally imperceptible event\u201d<\/em> thus demonstrating again that he considers the real presence of the Risen Jesus among the apostles to be only a private revelation which is externally imperceptible<\/em>. This is a heresy. The Evangelists, on the contrary, testify to obvious facts.<\/p>\n

Quote:<\/strong> \u201cRather, they (the apostles) want to testify to God\u2019s saving work in Jesus with the help of literary devices already known from the Old Testament (such as the \u2018scheme of revelation\u2019) used to reproduce God\u2019s revelation in word and deed.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Response:<\/strong> This is blasphemy and denial of God\u2019s revelation as such. The physical appearances of the Risen Christ are based on demonstrable facts, on historical events. M\u00fcller assumes the exactly opposite process. He claims that first there are ideas which the sacred author uses to create a story to demonstrate his thoughts. But this is a big delusion! If the physical appearances of the Risen Christ are not real, there is no true revelation of God in the Gospel or in the whole Scripture either.<\/p>\n

Quote:<\/strong> \u201cAn increasing interest in the transfigured corporeality of the risen Lord can be seen in the <\/em>individual<\/em> stages of tradition and in the editing<\/u><\/em> of the Easter story<\/em><\/u> in Mk and in the related Gospels of Mt and Lk and finally in another line of tradition in Jn<\/u>.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Response:<\/strong> What exactly is \u201canother line of tradition in Jn\u201d<\/em>? According to M\u00fcller, John was not much of a witness to Christ\u2019s resurrection and only recorded another line<\/em> of an evolving human tradition<\/em>. M\u00fcller thus completely denied the credibility of the apostles \u2013 the eyewitnesses of Christ\u2019s resurrection! However, the Apostle John testifies: \u201c<\/em>That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have touched \u2013 this we proclaim.<\/em>\u201d <\/em>(1Jn 1:1)<\/p>\n

What does M\u00fcller mean by \u201cediting\u201d<\/em>? Does it mean, in M\u00fcller\u2019s view, that the apostles were no eyewitnesses but mere journalists engaged in editing a story? Such edited works, however, can by no means be the Word of God! Christianity \u00e0 la M\u00fcller is thus built on shallow foundations, and the apostles and thousands of martyrs turn out to have died for these edited fictions.<\/p>\n

Quote:<\/strong> \u201cHowever, this is not evidence of an allegedly increasing reification or materialization of the resurrection faith, but an expression of delimitation against any docetistic or existentialist dilution of the Easter faith.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Response:<\/strong> In other words, according to M\u00fcller, the Evangelists did not want to pass off their texts as a recording of facts but, on the other hand, if someone plainly stated that these were just pious reflections and dreams of unreality, they would disagree too. So in M\u00fcller\u2019s view, the Gospel must be interpreted as a myth, but in such a way that he never openly says that it is a myth because this faithless exegete would thus lose influence and could no longer deceive his readers. Nobody cares about myths. They have no effect on people. Human life is affected by facts, by what happened, because if something happened once, it can happen a second time. If God really performed a miracle, He can do so again. If Christ was really raised from the dead, it means that we will be raised too. However, so-called \u201ctheologians\u201d \u00e0 la M\u00fcller do not like this idea. They need to produce some facts\/non-facts which they themselves do not have to believe in but can use them as a means of manipulating \u201ccommon believers\u201d.<\/p>\n

Quote:<\/strong> \u201cThe last level of reference<\/u> for the Easter event is the Father-Son relationship<\/em> that became visible in Jesus of Nazareth and its mediation in the Holy Spirit.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Response:<\/strong> What does it mean? M\u00fcller thus proves once again that he placed the encounter of the apostles with the Risen Jesus on the level of private revelation, so he can easily add another level of reference<\/em> to it. M\u00fcller shows Christianity in a light of a completely implausible fantasy.<\/p>\n

Quote:<\/strong> \u201cThe Easter kerygma does not mean to refer to a biological curiosity<\/u>…\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Response:<\/strong> On Good Friday, our Saviour suffered excruciating tortures and finally died on the cross for our salvation. By His glorious resurrection, He confirmed that He was not only true man but the Son of God. What an absurdity and gross blasphemy to degrade the resurrection to a \u201cbiological curiosity\u201d<\/em>! This is proof that theologians like M\u00fcller do not have a spark of reverence or relationship to the Lord Jesus Christ as their Saviour. What do these people want to tell us Christians? They do nothing but degrade, blaspheme and question the fundamental truths of the faith. Such theology is the death of Christianity! Such theologians are heretics, religious imposters and spiritual murderers.<\/p>\n

Quote:<\/strong> \u201c…but to testify<\/u> in the light of this event to the eschatological self-communication of God<\/u> in his divine name \u201cFather, Son and Spirit\u201d (Mt 28:19) and to make it accessible to all people in faith.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Response:<\/strong> M\u00fcller makes manipulative statements again and purposefully avoids the essence, absurdly describing the resurrection of Christ as \u201cself-communication of God\u201d<\/em>. The apostles were not called to testify \u201cto the eschatological self-communication of God\u201d<\/em> but to preach repentance for the forgiveness of sins and salvation which is in Christ crucified and risen (Lk 24; Acts 2:32). The resurrection is clear evidence of Christ\u2019s divinity and of the fact that His death for us was redemptive.<\/p>\n

Quote:<\/strong> \u201cThe resurrection of Jesus and the revelation of the sonship of the Word of the Father in the redeemed human nature of Jesus of Nazareth is an event without any analogy or parallel<\/u>.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Response:<\/strong> This is a lie. There are many parallels to both Christ\u2019s resurrection and the revelation of His divinity in His glorified human nature. The deity of Christ was not revealed only in His resurrection. The Lord Jesus proved His divinity by innumerable miracles performed both in the physical realm (healing and raising of the dead) and in the spiritual one (casting out demons, converting sinners). Among other things, these miracles prepared the disciples to be able to believe in His real resurrection. When Jesus stilled the storm on the sea, the disciples fell at His feet to worship Him, and said to one another: \u201cWho can this be, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?\u201d<\/em> In the region of Caesarea Philippi, the divinity of the Word in the flesh was revealed to Peter, who confessed: \u201cYou are the Christ, the Son of the living God.\u201d<\/em> On the Mount of Transfiguration, the glory of Christ\u2019s divinity was manifested in His flesh. Finally, Christ\u2019s resurrection was the culmination of all these miracles and the confirmation of His divinity. And if it was their culmination, it means that there is a certain resemblance between all the miracles of Christ, a certain common denominator, and that is the power of God, and also a certain common goal, and that is to bring people to the saving faith in the divinity of Christ.<\/p>\n

(to be continued)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

+ Elijah<\/p>\n

Patriarch of the Byzantine Catholic Patriarchate<\/p>\n

+ Methodius OSBMr\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 + Timothy OSBMr<\/p>\n

Secretary Bishops<\/p>\n

Fr Wenceslas\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Fr David<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Download:\u00a0Cardinal M\u00fcller is a heretic \/Part 2\/ (20\/4\/2020)<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

20 April 2020 Ad B) Quotes and responses to M\u00fcller\u2019s statements in his book \u201cCatholic Dogmatics\u201d Cardinal M\u00fcller, who is regarded as strongly conservative today, wrote a textbook of dogmatics, which definitely is not conservative, at a time when he was not yet a bishop. The book was published in 1995 under the title of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[72,40],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18278"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=18278"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18278\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18289,"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18278\/revisions\/18289"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18278"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=18278"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vkpatriarhat.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=18278"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}