Cardinal Burke: Formal correction of Amoris Laetitia could happen in New Year

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnnyc176
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

johnnyc176

Guest
catholicherald.co.uk/news/2016/12/20/cardinal-burke-explains-plan-for-formal-correction-of-amoris-laetitia-in-the-new-year/
Cardinal Burke also advised Catholics to remain “serene” by reaffirming the Church’s teaching. “I think the important thing for us as Catholics is simply to affirm once again what the Church has always taught and practiced,” he said. The cardinal made particular reference to the teachings expressed by Pope St John Paul II in Familiaris Consortio – which rules out Communion for the remarried – and Veritatis Splendor, which affirms the existence of absolute moral norms.
 
What would this formal correction look like and what is Pope Francis’ obligation if they do go forward with it? I tried finding some info but nobody talks about what the formal correction is.
 
Or Jesus could return, or Cardinal Burke might receive a correction, or we could have a new pope, or we could see massive agreement on Amoris Laetitia, or Pence might be the president, or…

If we are going to affirm what the Church has always taught, this would be a better point to start:

“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble." (Jesus - Sermon on the Mount)

Remember, this news took place in the context of an interview from a questionable source, one that has not been friendly to the Catholic Church. The answers are reflective of the questions that are asked. Speculation is pointless. It seemed to me like Cardinal Burke was just answering the question with minimum speculation and encouraging the faithful to follow the advice of Jesus (above). I think, like so many times, reporters, gossips and pot-stirrers want to keep the ant bed active.
 
Or Jesus could return, or Cardinal Burke might receive a correction, or we could have a new pope, or we could see massive agreement on Amoris Laetitia, or Pence might be the president, or…

If we are going to affirm what the Church has always taught, this would be a better point to start:

“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble." (Jesus - Sermon on the Mount)

Remember, this news took place in the context of an interview from a questionable source, one that has not been friendly to the Catholic Church. The answers are reflective of the questions that are asked. Speculation is pointless. It seemed to me like Cardinal Burke was just answering the question with minimum speculation and encouraging the faithful to follow the advice of Jesus (above). I think, like so many times, reporters, gossips and pot-stirrers want to keep the ant bed active.
😃 This post struck me as funny.

I agree though. Who knows really. I think sometimes people just gotta stir the pot again from time to time. 😛
 
What would this formal correction look like and what is Pope Francis’ obligation if they do go forward with it? I tried finding some info but nobody talks about what the formal correction is.
I was wondering about this as well - is there some kind of formal process for this? If not, it seems like the Pope could simply ignore it as he is currently doing with their list of questions that is still out there. I know there have been formal corrections of Popes in the past but not in recent times, so I am confused about what this would be like. It would certainly be an interesting situation if it really did happen.
 
I’m not really sure what a “formal correction” would amount to considering this:

Can. 1404 The First See is judged by no one.

He’s also saying Amoris Laetitia, an Apostolic Exhortation, is not part of the Magisterium…which is fascinating because he uses Familiaris Consortio as evidence for his position, which is also an Apostolic Exhortation.
 
What would this formal correction look like
From the article…
It would be like the request for clarification – five questions known as “dubia” – but “would no longer be raising questions, but confronting the confusing statements in Amoris Laetitia with what has been the Church’s constant teaching and practice, and thereby correcting Amoris Laetitia”.
 
From the article…
Right, I understand that part but I guess my question is what good would it do? If it’s like the current situation where the Pope can choose to respond or not, I don’t see what the difference would be between this situation and what we have now, where the Pope has declined to respond. Pope Francis would probably just ignore them again and nothing would happen.
 
Or Jesus could return, or Cardinal Burke might receive a correction, or we could have a new pope, or we could see massive agreement on Amoris Laetitia, or Pence might be the president, or…

If we are going to affirm what the Church has always taught, this would be a better point to start:

“Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble." (Jesus - Sermon on the Mount)

Remember, this news took place in the context of an interview from a questionable source, one that has not been friendly to the Catholic Church. The answers are reflective of the questions that are asked. Speculation is pointless. It seemed to me like Cardinal Burke was just answering the question with minimum speculation and encouraging the faithful to follow the advice of Jesus (above). I think, like so many times, reporters, gossips and pot-stirrers want to keep the ant bed active.
👍
 
And why would Cardinal Burke be receiving a correction? Or why do you think there would be a massive agreement on AL?

I wonder why it’s okay to be disrespectful to this prelate. :rolleyes:
Or Jesus could return, or Cardinal Burke might receive a correction, or we could have a new pope, or we could see massive agreement on Amoris Laetitia, or Pence might be the president, or…

If we are going to affirm what the Church has always taught, this would be a better point to start:
 
And why would Cardinal Burke be receiving a correction? Or why do you think there would be a massive agreement on AL?

I wonder why it’s okay to be disrespectful to this prelate. :rolleyes:
Why would the Pope? It would be terrible to be disrespectful to the Cardinal. I am glad everyone here is avoiding that.

I am sure that you do not think that what Cardinal Burke has speculated upon, that is fraternal correction, implies disrespect. I thought that was something we all agreed upon.

But yes, I think there is substantial majority agreement on Amoris Laetitia. It was written by the Pope after all, based on the Magisterium working through the Synod on the Family.
 
Why would the Pope? It would be terrible to be disrespectful to the Cardinal. I am glad everyone here is avoiding that.

I am sure that you do not think that what Cardinal Burke has speculated upon, that is fraternal correction, implies disrespect. I thought that was something we all agreed upon.

But yes, I think there is substantial majority agreement on Amoris Laetitia. It was written by the Pope after all, based on the Magisterium working through the Synod on the Family.
It’s okay to go against a Pope but not a Cardinal. Catholic Theology 101! 😉
 
A. Asking for formal correction, even from a Pope, is not without precedent.
B. It is not disrespectful.
C. Cardinal Burke is following correct procedure.
D. You do realize that EWTN and Raymond Arroyo interviewed Cardinal Burke 4 days ago or so about the dubia and that LifeSite published a **transcript ** of that interview, right? (Yes, I know the part specifically about the timeline of the correction was not part of the interview, but the dubia, the defense of the signers, the raison d’etre, etc are.
 
And why would Cardinal Burke be receiving a correction? Or why do you think there would be a massive agreement on AL?

I wonder why it’s okay to be disrespectful to this prelate. :rolleyes:
Perhaps because the perception is that he has been disrespectful to the Holy Father, inasmuch as his series of interviews, articles, and such seems similar to a high-profile attorney who goes about “trying his case in the media.”
 
Why would the Pope? It would be terrible to be disrespectful to the Cardinal. I am glad everyone here is avoiding that.

I am sure that you do not think that what Cardinal Burke has speculated upon, that is fraternal correction, implies disrespect. I thought that was something we all agreed upon.

But yes, I think there is substantial majority agreement on Amoris Laetitia. It was written by the Pope after all, based on the Magisterium working through the Synod on the Family.
Per Pope Benedict, fraternal correction is an act of love–not disrespect.
 
It’s okay to go against a Pope but not a Cardinal. Catholic Theology 101! 😉
A group of Cardinals, following proper procedure, asking the pope for clarification on an ambiguity that could lead to confusion and possibly division within the Church is not an act against the pope. In fact, it is part of the duty and responsibility of any Cardinal.

Popes and cardinals are human. They can make mistakes and sin.
 
Fr. Z posted an article on his blog on why the dubia is important as he references an article by Ross Douthat in the NY Times. In Canada there are now two different teachings concerning assisted suicide with one group of Bishops denying last rites to Catholics who are planning their own suicides. Then there is another group of Bishops that point to Amoris laetitia as a model for possibly allowing last rites to Catholics who are planning the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top