Cardinal Burke Outlines Formal Correction of Pope Francis’ Teaching

[ringil]

Cardinal Burke, by this continuance of inflamed rhetoric, is creating “his place” all by himself. When grinding an axe, one must be careful which way the sparks fall; carelessness could lead to self-immolation.

Burke’'s messages are dangerous. He has to know this.

He is forming a small but vocal segment of Catholics who see him as some kind of hero.

Burke has Francis in a bind. The Pope can’t discipline him without alienating thousands of Catholics. What would they do if their hero is chastised?

 

[irenaeus1]

Cardinal Burke, by this continuance of inflamed rhetoric, is creating “his place” all by himself. When grinding an axe, one must be careful which way the sparks fall; carelessness could lead to self-immolation.

This is the pope’s own doing. Address the dubia, and settle the matter. Whether or not one understands Burke’s motives is irrelevant, the questions put forth are legitimate.

 

[twf]

I wonder what the Holy Father can do to put Burke in his place.

Many “progressive” bishops openly defied St JPII and Benedict during their “conservative” reigns. Interesting that the same people who minimized papal primacy back then seek to magnify it now that a bishop who is at least left of centre sits on the papal throne.

For the record, I’m not anti-Francis by any means. He is my Pope. That being said, it would be nice to have clarity… we are in a situation where in some dioceses / countries the divorced and remarried can receive while in others they can’t. The episcopate is divided. This is a fact. It’s the Pope’s job to maintain unity.

 

[Randolph]

Cardinal Burke, by this continuance of inflamed rhetoric, is creating “his place” all by himself. When grinding an axe, one must be careful which way the sparks fall; carelessness could lead to self-immolation.

Please explain how is submitting the Dubia is “inflamed rhetoric”… Bishops and Cardinals have been recently basing their rationale on Amoris Laetitia to justify acceptance of adultery in the Catholic Church which has never been allowed by Christ and the Magisterium. Adulterers, without the need of repentance, can now presented themselves to the Eucharist in Argentina, Malta, Chicago, Munich; while they can not do so in Poland, Nigeria, Canada, Philadelphia, etc… Clearly, this is a grave matter and needs to be clarified.

What about other mortal sins? Based on the rationale put forth by the Malta conference of Bishops, if one is “at peace” with oneself, then can one’s conscience overrule the authority of Christ and the Magisterium on these matters? Some may say “yes”; some may say “no”. What then becomes of the Catholic Church if Christ reduced to taking a back seat to one’s consience?

It may sound ridiculous, but that is precisely how apostasy and heresies cause tremendous damages in the Church. So a papal clarification is absolutely needed to dispel all doubts and confusions.

 

[Mulligan2]

Sadly, whenever I hear Cardinal Burke’s named mentioned, he always seems to be nitpicking something that our great Pope Francis has said or done. In the spirit of charity, I’ll leave my comments at that.

 

[Randolph]

This is the pope’s own doing. Address the dubia, and settle the matter. Whether or not one understands Burke’s motives is irrelevant, the questions put forth are legitimate.

What’s so puzzling about the Dubia is that it simply seeks to uphold what Christ Himself and the Catholic Church have always taught…

 

[Dempsey1919]

Burke’'s messages are dangerous. He has to know this.

Cardinal Burke is a loyal son of the Church. His messages are only dangerous to those who want to contradict the Sacred Deposit of the Faith and undermine the magisterium of St. John Paul II. For example, the Bishops Conferences of Germany, Argentina, Malta. Compare their actions to the Bishops Conference of Poland. They directly contradict each other. What is sinful in Poland is not sinful in Malta - and that’s because of Amoris Laetitia. Doctrinal confusion reigns.

Pope Francis should ‘confirm his brethren’ by answering the five dubia. I’m sure the Holy Father would have no problem because it simply requires him to reaffirm the Faith of the Church. As the Roman Pontiff, that is his job. Fr Aidan Nichols has admitted that Amoris Laetitia teaches moral heresy. I thank Cardinal Burke for being the voice of one shouting in the wilderness. If only others had his courage.

 

[otjm]

I wonder what the Holy Father can do to put Burke in his place.

More of what he has done over the last several years; or in the alternative, simply continuing to ignore him.

Cardinal Burke, who said some time around the first session of the synod “I will resist him to his face” isn’t going to go away.

 

[unafraid]

Cardinal Burke is a loyal son of the Church. His messages are only dangerous to those who want to contradict the Sacred Deposit of the Faith and undermine the magisterium of St. John Paul II. For example, the Bishops Conferences of Germany, Argentina, Malta. Compare their actions to the Bishops Conference of Poland. They directly contradict each other. What is sinful in Poland is not sinful in Malta - and that’s because of Amoris Laetitia. Doctrinal confusion reigns.

Pope Francis should ‘confirm his brethren’ by answering the five dubia. I’m sure the Holy Father would have no problem because it simply requires him to reaffirm the Faith of the Church. As the Roman Pontiff, that is his job. Fr Aidan Nichols has admitted that Amoris Laetitia teaches moral heresy. I thank Cardinal Burke for being the voice of one shouting in the wilderness. If only others had his courage.

Cardinal Burke’s “insistences” have now taken on the tone of “demands” , and , frankly , they have become shrill and unpleasant. These melodramatics have really become alienating, and almost reach the level of hysterics. It is an embarrassment.

To “lionize” Cardinal Burke for fomenting so much discord in such a public way is wrong. The Roman Catholic Church is poorly served by this sort of open rancor.

 

[Seamus_L]

Is it now acceptable on CAF to refer to Cardinals or Bishops that one disagrees with, simply by their last name instead of their title ?

 

[Randolph]

Is it now acceptable on CAF to refer to Cardinals or Bishops that one disagrees with, simply by their last name instead of their title ?

Are you referring to a poster referring Cardinal Burke as “this Burke fellow”?

 

[Seamus_L]

I’ve seen more than one poster refer to the Cardinal as “Burke”.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Popes may take advice if they choose. There is no wrong when his brother Bishops clamour to offer advice, even after the Pope has spoken. While no other has authority to overrule the Pope in matters within his purview, the Pope has authority to clarify his own words or to correct himself. This is what Dubia and other measures aim to procure.

He was pretty clear after Malta .
Obviously the 4-1=3 Cardinals disagree.
Sorry, the politically correct expression is “confused” .

 

[Blue_Horizon]

That being said, it would be nice to have clarity… we are in a situation where in some dioceses / countries the divorced and remarried can receive while in others they can’t.

But, like the Cardinals, you dont really mean clarity do you?
The situation is clear.
Rather you seem to seek understanding?
God did not promise that on earth anywhere in the Bible did he…in fact the opposite if anything.

But if you are “unclear” about anything significant in particular Pope Francis’s wanted changed in AL do summaise with a clear sentence and we can try and clarify it for you.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Please explain how is submitting the Dubia is “inflamed rhetoric”… Bishops and Cardinals have been recently basing their rationale on Amoris Laetitia to justify acceptance of adultery in the Catholic Church which has never been allowed by Christ and the Magisterium. Adulterers, without the need of repentance, can now presented themselves to the Eucharist in Argentina, Malta, Chicago, Munich; while they can not do so in Poland, Nigeria, Canada, Philadelphia, etc… Clearly, this is a grave matter and needs to be clarified.

What about other mortal sins? Based on the rationale put forth by the Malta conference of Bishops, if one is “at peace” with oneself, then can one’s conscience overrule the authority of Christ and the Magisterium on these matters? Some may say “yes”; some may say “no”. What then becomes of the Catholic Church if Christ reduced to taking a back seat to one’s consience?

It may sound ridiculous, but that is precisely how apostasy and heresies cause tremendous damages in the Church. So a papal clarification is absolutely needed to dispel all doubts and confusions.

You seem to be frothing and fizzing all over the show like a new can of coke left out in the noonday sun. Try sitting in the shade.

Then quote where in AL Pope Francis justified adultery please?

BTW, Christ’s authority has always come from the back seat as you put it because that is exactly where the still quiet voice of conscience is heard…and it is conscience which gives authority to our faith in Christ, not the other way around I would have thought. Even Elijah in the cave knew that. You maybe the storm.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

What is sinful in Poland is not sinful in Malta - and that’s because of Amoris Laetitia.

What sin exactly are you referring to?
Yes we have a brief commandment thou shall not commit adultery.
We also have a brief commandment thou shall not kill.

For many years soldiering and Communion was banned by early church leaders and later allowed when Christianity became the State religion and killing was considered patriotic and also a defence of Christianity itself.

Clearly circumstances can change the rules for admittance to Communion.

The Church still abhors killing and adultery just as do the Commandments.

 

[Dempsey1919]

What sin exactly are you referring to?

In Malta, public adulterers may receive Holy Communion. In Poland, public adulterers may not receive Holy Communion. This is the direct result of Amoris Laetitia. This is why Cardinal Burke et al issued the dubia. This is why Fr Aidan Nichols calls for a change in canon law to correct ‘doctrinal waywardness.’

 

[Dempsey1919]

Clearly circumstances can change the rules for admittance to Communion.

No, they can’t. The 2000 year teaching of the Church is ABSOLUTELY clear on this issue. If you need evidence, start with the Bible and then read Familiaris Consortio by Saint John Paul II.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

In Malta, public adulterers may receive Holy Communion. In Poland, public adulterers may not receive Holy Communion. This is the direct result of Amoris Laetitia. This is why Cardinal Burke et al issued the dubia. This is why Fr Aidan Nichols calls for a change in canon law to correct ‘doctrinal waywardness.’

I would like you to provide the original texts which you believe support your somewhat extreme paraphrases.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

No, they can’t. The 2000 year teaching of the Church is ABSOLUTELY clear on this issue. If you need evidence, start with the Bible and then read Familiaris Consortio by Saint John Paul II.

So it should be easy for you to provide clearly infallible statements to support you claim which the Pope and the majority of Cardinals and theologians somehow must have missed .

Perhaps it is you who is infallible in interpretting tradition rather than Pope Francis given you somewhat naiively expect your somewhat extreme contribution here to be accepted purely on your own authority.