From what I’ve read, his term on the CDF was up, and he was not re-appointed. That’s a bit different that “dismissed.”
In addition, this was shortly before a report came out which criticized his handling of abuse accusations in Germany.
LifeSite seems to have “forgotten” to mention either of those parts of the story.
Fr. Z Blog…well, there ya go!
I know with everything going on, my guard has been down somewhat with regards to listening to various news sources. I still don’t trust LifeSiteNews, though, even though they broke the Vigano story.
I think they are speculating regarding motivations that they cannot possibly be privy to. Even given all the other stories swirling around, I cannot imagine this being the reason Pope Francis did not re-up Muller’s term at the CDF. It seems to me the more logical explanation is a conflict of personalities and theological outlook. Though even there, it’s not like Muller’s replacement was that different from him theologically—Ferrer was Muller’s number 2 at the CDF.
He is still quite young as a Cardinal and was not given another primary assignment. To any outsider that looks like a dismissal.
Note, I am not implying support for this article.
Well, not “any.” There could be any number of reasons for a prefect not to be re-assigned. Google can provide some possibilities, including multiple criticisms of his handling, and response to, abuse cases/allegations. Which is ironic, given the spin LifeSite is trying to put on this.
Right. It is uncommon for a cardinal who hadn’t even turned 70 yet not to be given any other job. So I can understand why some view it as a dismissal even though technically his term just wasn’t renewed.
The pope has his reasons, I’m sure. I don’t really find it profitable to speculate on what those are.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.