Sidebar
Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Cardinal Meisner Being Singled Out for Criticism Among the Four Cardinals

Cardinal Joachim Meisner is one of the Four Cardinals who have recently made public their own important dubia with regard to Amoris Laetitia. What is striking is that he seems now to have been singled out to receive several harsh critiques in Europe – especially in Italy and Germany.

As we already reported, Monsignor Pio Vito Pinto, Dean of the Roman Rota, specifically targeted Meisner in his earlier criticism of the Four Cardinals, saying that now a “shadow” was lying upon the German cardinal’s life history.

However, Dr. Markus Büning, a German theologian and book author, has recently come to the defense of the Four Cardinals, especially Cardinal Meisner. In his defense of Meisner, Büning also points out the fact that Pinto is Meisner’s inferior in rank and that he thus effectively violates a subordinate’s duty to show respect toward his superiors, especially in public. As I reported elsewhere:

Büning also shows himself “personally wounded” by these attacks [coming from Monsignor Pinto], especially those against Cardinal Meisner, whom he knows personally. He says: “Here I feel challenged to take sides with clarity about our beloved cardinal who has supported my book apostolate with a deeply impressive foreword to my last book on the virtues (“Encouragement to Holiness”), describing in a very personal way his own vocation to become a bishop. This man himself had to grow up under Communism [just as Bishop Athanasius Schneider did] and he still became priest – in spite of the obstacles. He always bravely witnessed to the Faith.” In a piercing tone, the German author comments: “Here, it is not fitting that a [subordinate] curial member [Monsignor Pinto] should rebuke him. And certainly not in this manner. [my emphasis]

At the time of his comment, Büning could not have been aware of Edward Pentin’s 6 December report that a “reliable source” had “told the Register that Francis had instructed Msgr. Pinto at that event to say something publicly critical of the cardinals.” Nevertheless, he appeared to have deduced that Pinto’s special harshness could only have been made possible by the protection he receives from above, likely from Pope Francis himself:

This clergyman of the Curia [Pinto] can, it seems, only use such [harsh] tones because his own superior – who sets the tone – wants it done, or at least tolerates it. If this is not the case, the pope should, please, rebuke this clergyman – who is now engaged in his fits of anger – and to do it in order to make clear to us Catholics that he himself does not accept such a style in our Church.

To return to the targeting of Cardinal Meisner, two different sources in Germany have now also issued comparably harsh rebukes against him. As the German branch of Vatican Radio reported on 5 December, Thomas Schüller, a German professor of Canon Law at the University of Münster, accused the Four Cardinals of being disloyal to Pope Francis. He said: “The open attempt of Meisner and of three additional cardinals to put pressure on the pope with the help of urgent letter is an act of disloyalty.” In Schüller’s eyes, however, Cardinal Meisner “could sleep quietly” because most probably he will not lose his red hat – even though this would be possible and permissible according to Canon Law: “the pope is free to name cardinals and to revoke their cardinalate.” Schüller continues his rebuke with the claim that Meisner’s recent public initative “has nearly something tragic about it,” since it was Meisner who was heretofore always especially loyal to all the previous popes. However, according to Schüller, now this cardinal “takes the position of a renegade.” [my emphasis]

A similarly – and surprisingly – strong rebuke comes from the prominent German newspaper Die Zeit, in whose sub-section Christ & Welt the author Christina Rietz compares Cardinal Meisner to a “guerrilla fighter.” In an article (entitled “The Poisoned Lines”) in the 8 December edition, she also highlights that Meisner was once known as an “officer in the General Staff” of the popes, and that, “politically, he was always in line.” Rietz rebukes Meisner for now acting more like a guerrilla  enemy partisan than like an obedient officer. The author then also points out that Meisner, with this Four Cardinals’ Letter, effectively criticizes the pope for having become a “renegade” himself, one “who left the correct teaching [on marriage and morality].” Then she quotes Pope Francis against Meisner, claiming that the latter has now become himself one of those “throwers of rocks” who have a rigid and “cold morality,” as mentioned in Amoris Laetitia. She ends her article with these words:

The power is not any more on his side [Meisner’s]. He turned from being an officer into a man of resistance and opposition, and this without any change of ideology. Treason [sic!] is always a question of date. [my emphasis]

It is noteworthy that the progressive media and theologians now in Germany unhesitatingly rebuke the Four Cardinals for their conscientious objections against parts of Amoris Laetitia. Did they also apply the same strictness with regard to their own obedience toward the pope when they were dealing with a progressive prelate such as Cardinal Karl Lehmann, who especially in the 1990s openly opposed Pope John Paul II and his Catholic moral teaching with regard to abortion by participating in the German system of providing counseling certificates which are necessary for a legally approved abortion? As we have reported earlier, Lehmann even spoke in an interview in May 2016 about his own manifest disobedience to Pope John Paul II’s own authority – who, in spite of Lehmann’s admitted many-year disobedience to him with regard to abortion, and also with regard to contraception, nonetheless still gave him “the red hat” in 2001. Lehmann – who is a member of the Sankt Gallen Group – himself had then said:

And with everything that smelled like a feint [such as the German Bishops’ participation in the abortion counseling system in the 1990s], this pope [John Paul II] – who was morally so straightforward – had great difficulties. I knew that, and I also knew that it was finally he who decides. This dissent, obviously, did not damage our relationship. An intimate friend of the pope told me first hand that my own nomination to the cardinalate in 2001 happened due to an explicit and conscious intervention by John Paul – and this after all the struggles. Today, I can well worship him as a saint. [my emphasis]

This quote is preceded by another one where Lehmann states how he himself opposed Pope John Paul II with regard to Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae:

And all that [experience] has helped me, for, when, in 1978 as a new president [of the German Bishops’ Conference], I sat with Pope John Paul II and he came to me with the same demand – namely, that the Declaration of Königstein [opposing Humanae Vitae] has to be removed – I responded with the words: “Holy Father, you did not ask this from my predecessor for ten years. Then, please, do not ask it from me now.” Today, I think I was quite bold. But, he might probably have realized that the difficult intimate questions of sexual morality are not solely to be solved by the means of prescriptions and interdictions. I myself wrote for him an assessment. He certainly had had more second thoughts. [my emphasis]

Did these journalists and theologians quoted in this article ever rebuke Cardinal Lehmann for his dissent? It seems now that certain media and theologians do not object if people who are “remarried” divorcees now disobey God’s Law; however, they do mind if some of the cardinals seem to disobey the unclear words of the current pope. This is an irony of our history.

meisner-1
In this image following the election of his friend, Joseph Ratzinger, as Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Meisner, directly to the left of the Holy Father, Stands alone amongst the group.

But let us ask a more fundamental question with regard to Cardinal Meisner. What could be the reason for these harsh verbal attacks on him? He who already himself had so much to endure in order to live under a cruel dictatorship in Communist East Germany? Could it be that it is because he later came to have a special importance and prominence in Germany, also due to his close personal bond with the former Pope Benedict XVI? As we have reported recently, Meisner is known to have played a pivotal role in fighting off the Bergoglio camp at the 2005 Conclave which then elected Pope Benedict. Is this current harsh criticism of him then, perhaps, a late and spiteful revenge for his valiant fight back in 2005? And maybe even also for his earlier resistance against the apparatus of the Sankt Gallen Group, as well?

49 thoughts on “Cardinal Meisner Being Singled Out for Criticism Among the Four Cardinals”

  1. The whole situation is extremely sad. These Good Cardinals and Bishops have done what is required of them, however for me it’s depressing that PF hasn’t stopped the attack against those that are involved with the DUBIA letter….

    Reply
    • Not only has PF not stopped the attacks against these courageous and faithful Cardinals, but, according to Edward Pentin, he has ENCOURAGED it!

      Reply
  2. I wonder how many of those old men in the above picture are dead? The faithful among them are enjoying their reward. Some are having their cowardice burned off in Purgatory. Some are burning for eternity in Hell because they would not stand with Christ when they had the opportunity. I don’t want to pray for the traitors but I will.

    Reply
  3. Neoreactionaries have a political adage: The Left is a machine for seizing and retaining power. In other words, all their high-flown principles and philosophies are mere tactics suited to the end of gaining power, nothing more. Once they succeed, they switch seamlessly to authoritarianism and suppress their opponents with a far greater ruthlessness than they ever suffered.

    As in politics, so in the Church. As long as they were in “opposition”, the modernist revolutionaries exalted dissent and collegiality. Now that they have the whip hand, they demand absolute loyalty and submission to the will of the pope, the very Oracle of the Holy Spirit. Dissent becomes evidence of a “bad spirit”, and collegiality is approved only so long as it produces their preferred outcomes.

    Reply
  4. This sentence stands out here: “At the time of his comment, Büning could not have been aware of Edward Pentin’s 6 December report that a “reliable source” had “told the Register that Francis had instructed Msgr. Pinto at that event to say something publicly critical of the cardinals.”” More and more the facts, what is actually happening in the Vatican these days, belie the carefully crafted image of Pope Francis. As the years pass, the veneer of humility wears very thin.

    Reply
  5. I am sure the Cardinals knew that these petty attacks would be forthcoming and were prepared for it. None of the critics even come close to dealing with the issues set out in the dubia – their only strategy is the “ad hominem.” However, we should be encouraged by this because this is evidence they have already conceded the argument. They have lost the battle. The only thing left to them is brute power, dissembling, lies and misdirection. The weapons of the devil are all that they have left and she who has already crushed his head will be triumphant over them all by the holy power of her Immaculate Heart.

    Reply
    • Exactly. After all the name-calling and huffing and puffing, Catholics should respond: “Thank you for your opinion of me. Now, to get back to the topic, can you please answer the questions posed by the dubia? Here, let me repeat them for you…”

      Reply
    • I agree that the modernists essentially already have lost the battle by their “ad hominem” attacks. This doesn’t imply, however, that they are no longer able to win the war. For actually it doesn’t matter much whether the Pope gives in to the objections of the four Cardinals or not. The real decisive point is his policy on sacramental discipline. Whatever the outcome of this conflict, moral laxism will continue. Even if the Pope produced a fully orthodox document for the sake of unity and peace, he would still not act against the German bishops and numerous others elsewhere who admit everyone to holy communion and for all practical purposes have abrogated the category of sexual sin. He would do nothing against Cupich’s policy of welcoming the civilly divorced and remarried, gay couples, &c. Everything would remain the same decadent mess. Only the theory would be restored, not the practice.

      The real point is thus not the affirmation of doctrine, but practically implementing and enforcing it, which implies sending away public sinners from the altar rails. That’s the decisive and tangible change that must happen, or else we’ll face the complete collapse of Catholicism. And that decisive change will not happen under Francis or under any pro-Vatican II Pope. Even such a giant as John Paul II completely disregared sacramental discipline.

      Reply
  6. If there was ever a shadow on the life of Cardinal Meisner, it has been dispelled by the light of his courage and faithfulness to Christ. God bless him, and all those who persevere on the side of truth, to navigate the Church through this mess.

    Reply
    • True. I have relatives and listening to them is painful. I occasionally speak some truth to them, in a very benign way, and the confusion on their part is palpable. These are highly educated people who have forsaken logic for emotion.

      Reply
      • I feel your pain. I am the only non-liberal in my family. It took me a while, but I finally learned to quit arguing with them and only give my opinion when asked. Possibly making some headway in the evil of abortion…but the election was excruciating….hahaha.

        Reply
  7. When Christian bakers, teachers and schools children are forced to celebrate “marriage” of sodomites, when sodomites have won over the UN and many governments to guarantee them an alleged right to adopt children, when gender ideology is imposed on the youngest as a scientifically proven reality, and refusal to submit to it is being criminalized, when help/therapy for intrinsically disordered and gender confused is outlawed, these Bergoglians simply do not want to bother answering the dubia questions.
    There is so much Catholic truth, while successfully outlawed by the state and the UN, still to deem outdated and rigid, still to ridicule and remove from Church teaching!
    While all this evil is spreading like a wild fire, Jorge Bergoglio acts, as though he has no idea where “forward” his new pastoral approach has already taken us. He acts as though he has no idea, what children are forcefully indoctrinated with, against their parents’ convictions and wishes. For truth’s sake! He himself, back in Argentina, encouraged divorcees to fish for priest who would bless adultery! He himself, as pope, kisses the hands of a sodomy-promoting old Jesuit.

    Due to our standards as Catholics, we insist on being cautious with passing judgement. Many act, as though judging sin as sin, error as error, and evil as evil is un-Christian. Many give credit, where credit has been spent many times over, a long time ago. The enemy of the Catholic Faith does not play by our rules.

    Reply
    • I should have added:
      Jorge Bergoglio and team might ask:
      And just how does undue focus on adultery or abortion (necessary consequence of sexual rights) help with saving mother earth and creation of world-peace and equitable wealth distribution? Even the Greek Patriarch put his weight behind the AL footnote, explaining that God is too big to care about our moral conduct. This is probably why, according to this logic, He gave us His commandments? (I am sure the Patriarch didn’t mean recycling and population control as outside of divine interest)

      Reply
  8. The good Cardinal should not be bothered by those words. Consider the sources of them and it’s easy to disregard them.

    Reply
  9. To have the likes of Pinto and Lehmann as your adversaries speaks highly of Cardinal Meisner. God reward this virtuous pastor, and may God rebuke those who seek to undermine the perennial Magisterium.
    Long have I wondered why John Paul did not put the heterodox to rest, instead of letting them worm away in the dark ready to emerge with a vengeance us after his demise? I have always excused him – recalling the wretched state of the Church when he was elected – assuming he acted out of a desire to heal. Surely there is truth in that, but his episcopal appointments – such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his legion are inexcusable — inexcusable.
    Lehmann’s remarks regarding Pope John Paul are true. And as much as I venerate Pope Saint John Paul, and credit him for many graces which I have received, I cannot help but be bitter at the horrific mess he left us with these wretched episcopal appointments. I saw it while he was alive. I excused him, deeming him wise enough to know what he was doing. I was wrong. He was wrong. History will not treat this well

    Reply
  10. His Eminence Cardinal Meisner is born of God. Everyone who loves is born of God, and His Eminence Cardinal Meisner loves God’s truth, and God’s flock. Whoever opposes him is in league with the devil. Meisner is a saint. May no weapon formed against him ever prosper, O God, and deign to swiftly succour those who, universally opposed and battered by the rages of the enemies of Christ, stand to defend the truth. Your kingdom come, your will be done, and destroy this day the power of the evil one who has ensnared the holy Church, and deliver us all from every evil, restoring the Church’s hierarchy and position in the world as the Speaker of Truth, and anathematizing the heresies which seek to destroy Her. Bring a true shepherd to the pinnacle of the Church, and destroy utterly those prelates who will not be converted to your Truth.

    Reply
    • I agree with you that Cardinal Meisner is a saint. I lived briefly in the Cologne archdiocese when he was the Ordinary and he lost no time in deal with a liturgical abuse that I brought to his attention. May he be strengthened in this time of trial.

      Reply
  11. ‘However, according to Schüller, now this cardinal “takes the position of a renegade.”’

    This pope is the real renegade from the Faith!

    Reply
  12. Christine Rietz quotes, “….Meisner….was always politically in line.” What does that mean? Is Christ’s Church politically correct? Do we not rather have Truth on our side no matters where the winds of political correctness takes us? O Jesu! Send us your Spirit to dispel with his winds the stench of political correctness!

    Reply
  13. It is a black and white issue. To attack the messenger of a question put about the truth, (undeniably on behalf of the Truth) is obviously motivated by something that is not the Truth.

    The alinsky tactics of isolate, demonize, etc., should be powerless as hopefully, the Cardinal understands that eternal stakes are at odds with the worldly goals of Bergoglio’s henchmen.

    Reply
  14. Each cardinal will be dealt with one at a time by attack–isolate–destroy.
    When one of the four is attacked, the other three should leap to his defense immediately or each will be carried out individually.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...