‘Sandro Magister reflects on the detente between Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and liberation theologian Gustavo Gutiérrez.’

That Archbishop Mueller and Gustavo Gutierrez are in amicable detente is hardly news worthy as serious reflection. The Archbishop – properly if confusedly – believes the Gutierrez model of Liberation Theology is to be numbered among the most significant currents of Catholic Theology in the 20th century. This significance does not remove the condemnation of its errors; it is, after all, not true that Vatican Council II was the event that most marked the history of the Church in the past century – that place must still go to Modernism, its all-consuming Indifferentism, and the wholesale mayhem caused by bending the Faith to fit the shape demanded in passing Ideological flights of image (under the cover of Vat II spirit-led renewal).

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10pasce.htm

No, what would be news-worthy of reflection might be found in Archbishop Mueller stepping a little outside his comfort zone – in his studious affinity with Gutierrez et al – and actually engaging positively, supportively and fruitfully with the SSPX. Understanding if not embracing the all too glaring reality set out by his brother bishop, Athanasius Schneider – accepting the need to define the errors arising from false interpretation of the Second Vatican Council. And since the Sovereign Pontiff is not about condemnation (except for the things he condemns) and all about approval (except toward the things of which he disapproves), well, it is not beyond the wit of man to meet the requirements of all three .. if only in the name of the sole genuinely liberating source of theology: Sacred Tradition.

Where the Catholic Church stands; it is an orthodox gloss that is part of an authoritative edition of Holy Scripture. The Three Witnesses belong – comma and all, complete – in the Clementine Vulgate edition (either in the passage or as a gloss); scholars cannot chop out a piece because it displeases them, because it is not in another edition, or because it is a misplaced gloss .. only the Magisterium may decide to alter or adjust it. Note well, I speak of the Clementine Vulgate not the Holy Bible per se; this Vulgate version included it as an orthodox variant standard in late Western editions of Jerome’s translation; the disputed gloss – not in any of the earlier Greek editions – belongs in the Clementine Vulgate (if not other versions) and cannot be removed other than in an authoritatively approved edition.

That it is an ancient gloss cannot be disputed, it is understood in Priscillian’s Book of Apologetics reflecting the common presentation of Cyprian’s witness to the Heavenly Witnesses Who are One in the Unity of the Church. It does not belong in the earlier editions of the Vulgate, especially those early members of the family of variations in Jerome’s own translation – therefore it should not be inserted into these to make them fit with later editions. The Holy Office – contrary to scholarly opinion – very properly warned scholars that it was ‘unsure’ opinion that the Comma was not part of the Vulgate family of tradition .. and that since the Clementine Vulgate was the basis for approved Catholic worship so scholars could not take it upon themselves to alter this edition to fit opinion (i.e. it is not scholars who approve the Holy Bible, rather the Church Fathers approve its use), cf Actae Sanctae Sedis, 1896-7.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ass/index_sp.htm

The rush to follow scholars’ opinions above the mild warnings of authority is a Protestant indeed a heretical spirit (favoured by high-spirited and proud-hearted scholars from Marcion to Galileo to Loisy to …). And this whole issue shows the fantastic lengths to which that spirit of protest can go; the headlong leap into the historical sic (or put in whatever the current scholarly fashion happens to be) reading of Scripture as opposed to reading and understanding and judging its content as revelation has led many Protestants and their faith communities closer to perdition. Denying that the Comma is part of the Clementine edition of the Vulgate is not only insecure scholarship it is false scholarship; that the Comma is not part of earlier Latin and Greek editions is sound scholarship, therefore it is for the Church authority to amend, note or otherwise explain the presence (scholars to consider it, and properly advise – at very most).

‘This decree has been issued to repress the temerity of those private teachers who have attributed to themselves the right of completely rejecting this “comma” of St. John or at least by their final judgement of calling it into doubt.. It is in no way intended to deter Catholic writers from investigating the matter more fully, .. or from adopting an opinion opposed to the genuineness of the text, as long as they profess to be willing to submit to the judgement of the Church, to whom has been committed by Jesus Christ the duty not only of interpreting the Sacred Scriptures but also of guarding them faithfully.’ Documenta Ecclesiastica Sacram Scripturam Spectantia, Romae, apud Librariam Vaticanum 1927.

;0)