The Müller Mirage

[Stone]

The Müller Mirage
Why Conservatives Keep Crowning a Theologian Who Undid the Faith

Chris Jackson via Hiraeth in Exile | Sep 17, 2025

Gerhard Ludwig Müller is trending again. Diane Montagna just dropped Part I of a two-part interview (released today, September 17, 2025), and the Catholic commentariat is buzzing ahead of Part II tomorrow. Here at last, they say, is a prelate who calls Charlie Kirk a martyr, who calls the LGBT “Jubilee” a desecration, who names Islam and wokeism as cultural poisons. Traditionalists and conservatives alike are hailing him as a bulldog against Leo XIV’s Vatican.

But if Müller is our savior, then the Church has truly forgotten how to tell the difference between orthodoxy and camouflage. The record of his writings is the man. And that record reveals a disciple of Rahner, Kant, and Gutierrez.


Transubstantiation Replaced

In his theology manuals, Müller insists that “body and blood” do not mean the physical Christ under the accidents of bread and wine. Instead, he offers “transcommunication”: Christ’s presence is mediated symbolically, communicable in perception, a “reality-symbol.” Substance is no longer metaphysical reality but “food” and “human community.” The question of when the conversion happens he dismisses as meaningless.

This is the very dodge Pius XII warned against in Humani Generis: replacing the clear substance–accident language of Trent with elastic phenomenologies that empty the dogma while retaining its vocabulary. The altar is evacuated under the pretense of profundity.


The Virginity of Mary Dismantled

Worse still, Müller’s Katholische Dogmatik reduces the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God to metaphorical “horizons.” He flatly denies that the doctrine entails the bodily integrity of Mary during birth. Gone is the miraculous virginitas in partu defined by Fathers and popes, replaced with talk of “eschatological salvation” and the “personal relationship” of Mary to Jesus.

He approvingly cites Karl Rahner’s notorious minimization of the dogma; so notorious the Holy Office censored Rahner for it in 1962. Yet Müller, hailed as a “guardian of orthodoxy,” recycles the very error the pre-conciliar magisterium condemned.

Contrast this with St. Thomas and St. Augustine, who affirm that Christ was born utero clauso, as light passes through glass. That is the faith of the Church. Müller, by comparison, drowns it in transcendental gobbledygook.


Resurrection Reduced

The Resurrection fares no better. In his 2010 Dogmatik, Müller insists no camera could have recorded it; the event was not historical in the ordinary sense, but a “transcendental consummation.” What is historically verifiable, he says, is not the empty tomb or the risen Christ, but only the disciples’ belief.

This is Modernist reduction. It recasts the Resurrection as subjective faith-experience, precisely the tactic Pius X exposed in Pascendi: the “communication of an original experience.” If you believe because Peter believed, but the historical tomb does not matter, then Christianity is emptied into myth.


Vatican II Absolutized

Müller was no friend to Tradition in practice. As prefect of the CDF he told the SSPX that acceptance of Vatican II is as binding as belief in the Resurrection. He insisted they accept religious liberty and ecumenism as “fundamental human rights.” He demanded recognition of the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo Missae.

Here is the irony: Müller himself compared Vatican II’s pastoral novelties to the dogma of Easter, while in his own writings he stripped Easter of its historical core. This is the theologian conservatives now want to canonize as their lion.


Ecumenism and Liberation Theology

Müller publicly declared Catholics and Protestants already constitute “the one visible Church,” contradicting the dogma of the Mystical Body defined by Pius XII. He praised Gustavo Gutierrez, the Marxist-tinted liberation theologian, as one of the greats, and even coauthored a book with him. This reveals where Müller’s loyalties have long been.


Amoris Laetitia: From Resistance to Retreat

Conservatives often cite his resistance to Amoris Laetitia. But in 2017, after Francis stripped his allies from the CDF, Müller pivoted: Amoris, he said, posed “no danger to the faith.” The text was “very clear.” Clear in what? In ambiguity. Instead of standing up for the sanctity of marriage, Muller maneuvered to preserve status.


Why This Matters Under Leo

Leo XIV’s Vatican is a carnival of desecration. Transvestites in sanctuaries, rainbow-lit jubilees, and bishops outlawing the Latin Mass. The only antidote is dogma taught in eodem sensu, eademque sententia. Yet the man conservatives are celebrating as the antidote has already surrendered that ground. He denies the physical integrity of Mary’s virginity. He redefines transubstantiation into symbol. He relativizes the Resurrection into disciples’ belief. He binds Catholics to Vatican II as if it were revelation itself.

That is not a champion of orthodoxy. It is the revolution in disguise.


Stop Lowering the Bar

Traditional Catholics used to measure fidelity by adherence to defined dogma. Now they measure it by whether a man condemns gender ideology on camera. The Church deserves better. The martyrs did not die for soundbites. They died for the faith defined at Trent, Constantinople, and Lateran.

If Müller wishes to be counted among the defenders of the flock, let him repent of his errors, retract his Rahnerian evasions, and affirm the mysteries in the words the Church herself uses. Until then, conservatives coronating him are not resisting the revolution. They are laundering it.