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

[Convert_in_99]

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.

Personally I believe the division has already been created by not just going along with the pope in the first place.

Yes I realize they are all human. As to their mistakes I wouldn’t be caught dead in judgement of the Pope.

 

[Convert_in_99]

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.

Nowhere in that document was this even mentioned, let alone allowed. If the Bishops got that from this document I think they must have been reading the wrong document.

 

[Brendan]

Personally I believe the division has already been created by not just going along with the pope in the first place…

What does it mean 'to go along with the Pope" when you having question about what the Pope is even trying to say in the first place?

 

[Convert_in_99]

What does it mean 'to go along with the Pope" when you having question about what the Pope is even trying to say in the first place?

I understand your concern, but it is not what the Pope said but, rather, other’s interpretations of it that are the issue at hand. There were those who have disagreed with Church teachings for quite some time who were just lying in wait for a loophole. They took this and ran with it, as has the media and press and anyone else lying in wait for a justification to their particular “cause.”

 

[johnnyc176]

Nowhere in that document was this even mentioned, let alone allowed. If the Bishops got that from this document I think they must have been reading the wrong document.

Then there is another group of Bishops that **point to Amoris laetitia as a model **

 

[johnnyc176]

I understand your concern, but it is not what the Pope said but, rather, other’s interpretations of it that are the issue at hand. There were those who have disagreed with Church teachings for quite some time who were just lying in wait for a loophole. They took this and ran with it, as has the media and press and anyone else lying in wait for a justification to their particular “cause.”

Okay so here is an opportunity to close the loophole.

 

[Convert_in_99]

johnnyc176:
It isn’t their model, it’s their loophole. AL does not in any way shape or form promote suicide assisted or otherwise.

 

[Convert_in_99]

Okay so here is an opportunity to close the loophole.

Maybe, but it seems to be stirring up more trouble than necessary. It should never have been made public. Ever. That was the biggest mistake. If it doesn’t work privately try again privately. What if the Pope says no again? Then what? We are looking at the next Orthodox/SSPX-type schism here. Over what? A simple misunderstanding of Our Holy Father’s intentions. We’ve misunderstood him before and there wasn’t all this hoopla attached to those misunderstandings.

 

[Randolph]

Personally I believe the division has already been created by not just going along with the pope in the first place.

Yes I realize they are all human. As to their mistakes I wouldn’t be caught dead in judgement of the Pope.

Strong and fundamental disagreements among members of the Church hierarchy were part of Church history. This was how potential errors were corrected. It is nothing new under the sun. Below is an example of Pope John XXII in the 14th century:

"Pope John XXII in the 14th century was publicly challenged by cardinals, bishops, and lay theologians after denying the doctrine that the souls of the just are admitted to the beatific vision after death, teaching instead that heaven is delayed until the general resurrection at the end of time. Pope John eventually recanted his position, due in part to a joint letter from theologians from the University of Paris that professed total obedience to the pope while making it clear to him that his teaching contradicted the Catholic faith. "

google.com/amp/s/www.lifesitenews.com/mobile/news/exclusive-cardinal-burke-suggests-timeline-for-formal-correction-of-pope-fr

 

[johnnyc176]

It isn’t their model, it’s their loophole. AL does not in any way shape or form promote suicide assisted or otherwise.

You are not understanding what ‘model’ means in this case. Maybe a better way to say it is that those Bishops are using AL as an example. You should read the article.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Personally I believe the division has already been created by not just going along with the pope in the first place.

Yes I realize they are all human. As to their mistakes I wouldn’t be caught dead in judgement of the Pope.

But they are not sitting in judgment of the Pope.

They are going along with the teachings of the Catholic Church and making sure that areas of a document which are being read ambiguously and by some in a way which appears could contradict dogma/doctrine, are addressed so that all can be certain that the dogmatic/doctrinal teachings of the Church are not changed and cannot be contradicted.

As we have noted, there are already ‘case by case’ scenarios, not just here with regard to divorced-and-remarried-Catholics being able to receive ‘even if they are planning to continue sexual relations in a marriage not found valid by the Church’, on Catholics 'with the accompaniment of a prelate choosingfor themselves whether to consider their present marriage ‘valid’. . .but also cases whereby the bishops of one Canadian area are saying that the anointing of the sick may not be given to those who plan to commit suicide, and the bishops of another Canadian area saying the sacrament may be given and citing the 'view of Pope Francis as conveyed in AL as the reason.

So important as marriage is, it appears that the ambiguity of this particular text is spilling over onto other sacraments in the Church. And we are faced with the personal decisions of one man --an area’s bishop–and in some cases with one priest --'the one accompanying those in discernment–who take it upon themselves to make a judgment binding their faithful by saying ‘This may be done’–and the personal decisions of one man, etc. etc binding their faithful with ‘this may not be done.’

Do you not see the problem? Do you not see the harm this does to all the Faithful? Either teachings bind all, whether one lives in Toledo or Timbuktu, when it comes to the magisterium and the dogma and doctrine of the Church --not to mention the teachings on divorce come from the lips of Christ Himself --or hey, what is ‘dogma’ this year for the people in Peoria is no longer dogma for those in Phnom Pen, if I want to be able to disregard the doctrine of X in my diocese I can choose Father McMercy who never met a scenario he couldn’t approve ‘in good conscience’.

Jesus Christ King of the Universe is being turned into Jesus the Burger King where everyone from laity on up can go through His teachings and “have it their way”.

 

[johnnyc176]

Maybe, but it seems to be stirring up more trouble than necessary. It should never have been made public. Ever. That was the biggest mistake. If it doesn’t work privately try again privately. What if the Pope says no again? Then what? We are looking at the next Orthodox/SSPX-type schism here. Over what? A simple misunderstanding of Our Holy Father’s intentions. We’ve misunderstood him before and there wasn’t all this hoopla attached to those misunderstandings.

Well this misunderstanding concerns the salvation of souls.

 

[7_Sorrows]

But they are not sitting in judgment of the Pope.

They are going along with the teachings of the Catholic Church and making sure that areas of a document which are being read ambiguously and by some in a way which appears could contradict dogma/doctrine, are addressed so that all can be certain that the dogmatic/doctrinal teachings of the Church are not changed and cannot be contradicted.

As we have noted, there are already ‘case by case’ scenarios, not just here with regard to divorced-and-remarried-Catholics being able to receive ‘even if they are planning to continue sexual relations in a marriage not found valid by the Church’, on Catholics 'with the accompaniment of a prelate choosingfor themselves whether to consider their present marriage ‘valid’. . .but also cases whereby the bishops of one Canadian area are saying that the anointing of the sick may not be given to those who plan to commit suicide, and the bishops of another Canadian area saying the sacrament may be given and citing the 'view of Pope Francis as conveyed in AL as the reason.

So important as marriage is, it appears that the ambiguity of this particular text is spilling over onto other sacraments in the Church. And we are faced with the personal decisions of one man --an area’s bishop–and in some cases with one priest --'the one accompanying those in discernment–who take it upon themselves to make a judgment binding their faithful by saying ‘This may be done’–and the personal decisions of one man, etc. etc binding their faithful with ‘this may not be done.’

Do you not see the problem? Do you not see the harm this does to all the Faithful? Either teachings bind all, whether one lives in Toledo or Timbuktu, when it comes to the magisterium and the dogma and doctrine of the Church --not to mention the teachings on divorce come from the lips of Christ Himself --or hey, what is ‘dogma’ this year for the people in Peoria is no longer dogma for those in Phnom Pen, if I want to be able to disregard the doctrine of X in my diocese I can choose Father McMercy who never met a scenario he couldn’t approve ‘in good conscience’.

Jesus Christ King of the Universe is being turned into Jesus the Burger King where everyone from laity on up can go through His teachings and “have it their way”.

 

[Convert_in_99]

Ok y’all whatever. I’ve said my piece. Signing off.

 

[Peter_J]

As they say “Nothing new under the sun”. My whole life there have been documents coming out of the Vatican, and my whole life there have been Catholics complaining about those documents.

 

[Thomas_White]

Maybe, but it seems to be stirring up more trouble than necessary. It should never have been made public. Ever. That was the biggest mistake. If it doesn’t work privately try again privately. What if the Pope says no again? Then what? We are looking at the next Orthodox/SSPX-type schism here. Over what? A simple misunderstanding of Our Holy Father’s intentions. We’ve misunderstood him before and there wasn’t all this hoopla attached to those misunderstandings.

It is not the case that the controversy over AL is merely a misunderstanding. Not at all. There is, for example, the letter to the Arg. bishops.

 

[Wesrock]

Popes have been corrected before. By bishops. By people who’ve gone on to be saints. It doesn’t undermine papal infallibility as defined by the councils or the Pope’s rightful authority. Regarding AL, I will of course follow Rome, and I’ll accept whatever comes out of the discussions over it.

 

[TCEL]

Someone I know, a weekly conservative mass-goer, said several months ago that they heard from the news that Pope Francis was going to allow communion for divorced/remarried, and that they thought this a good thing. Is it really so difficult to understand why someone would come to this conclusion, based on the news, combined with the ambiguity? It seems that most people who would truly wrestle with this question are people like me who were taught that this could not be. No, even that’s not true, because this person was taught that as well.

It bothers me that people are telling me I’m wrong to have questions about this, and that the confusion is all in my head. Trust me, it was there months ago before the dubia. (It really started with the breeding like rabbits comment and the contraception flap.)

At the end of the day I will acquiesce to the Church, but I can’t lie and say I’ll be able to explain it without feeling like I’m explaining stuff away. I can’t see how that’s a good thing. I will try to admit that the misunderstanding lies in my reasoning… But I just don’t see how the same logic being used in this case couldn’t be applied to other realms, or that it isn’t flat-out contradicting what I learned. I simply don’t see how it couldn’t be applied to cohabitation.

 

[10gr8kids]

Someone I know, a weekly conservative mass-goer, said several months ago that they heard from the news that Pope Francis was going to allow communion for divorced/remarried, and that they thought this a good thing. Is it really so difficult to understand why someone would come to this conclusion, based on the news, combined with the ambiguity? It seems that most people who would truly wrestle with this question are people like me who were taught that this could not be. No, even that’s not true, because this person was taught that as well.

It bothers me that people are telling me I’m wrong to have questions about this, and that the confusion is all in my head. Trust me, it was there months ago before the dubia. (It really started with the breeding like rabbits comment and the contraception flap.)

At the end of the day I will acquiesce to the Church, but I can’t lie and say I’ll be able to explain it without feeling like I’m explaining stuff away. I can’t see how that’s a good thing. I will try to admit that the misunderstanding lies in my reasoning… But I just don’t see how the same logic being used in this case couldn’t be applied to other realms, or that it isn’t flat-out contradicting what I learned. I simply don’t see how it couldn’t be applied to cohabitation.

:sad_yes:
One good thing…this has me praying a whole lot more for our pope, bishops, and the Church. I never really thought much about it before, knowing that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide her and the gates of Hell would not prevail. I still believe this, but now I know we have to do our part-prayer!

 

[TCEL]

:sad_yes:
One good thing…this has me praying a whole lot more for our pope, bishops, and the Church. I never really thought much about it before, knowing that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide her and the gates of Hell would not prevail. I still believe this, but now I know we have to do our part-prayer!

I told myself I wouldn’t get involved in this thread because I’m getting vibes that to question is to unnecessarily stir the pot. But, that’s not my intention. (Hey, I think all this recent conversation supports that intent matters. ) I am not trying to be deliberately obtuse. At worst, it just means I’m slow.