Cardinal Burke Outlines Formal Correction of Pope Francis’ Teaching

[Rau]

Are you able to you just ask a single, unqualified question in single clear sentence?
Or is the shotgun firing off in all directions effect an unusual rhetorical device that doesn’t actually require my respknse .

Your posts today Blue appear to be aggressive toward posters, rather than address the subject matter.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

1. So what if my name is not twf.

It means you got to the same location by a different path. I interested in how twf got there not you.

1. Pope Francis did not endorse the Malta bishops statement.

Well we have no common factual ground to discuss further then.

I did not state that my sister was committing adultery.

By all means be pedantic and pull up the drawbridge and leave it there.
But then why try and dialogue .

 

[twf]

It means you got to the same location by a different path. I interested in how twf got there not you.

Well we have no common factual ground to discuss further then.

By all means be pedantic and pull up the drawbridge and leave it there.
But then why try and dialogue .

I think the Holy Father endorsed the Argentines, not the Maltese. As I understand it, the Maltese “implementation” of AL is more “progressive” than the Argentine implementation. The latter envisioned extraordinary circumstances discerned with a priest. The former seems to leave it to the conscience of each couple. I could be wrong.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Your posts today Blue appear to be aggressive toward posters, rather than address the subject matter.

You mean shining a light on passive aggression and unjustified dogmatism against Pope Francis is unchristian .

 

[Dempsey1919]

Blue Horizon:

You mean shining a light on passive aggression and unjustified dogmatism against Pope Francis is unchristian

Blue, everybody here loves Pope Francis. Our words aren’t passive aggressive; they demonstrate the true feelings of disorientation and confusion caused by the Pope’s ambiguity and silence in the face of grave theological crisis.

Can’t you see the confusion and disunity? The Sacred Deposit of Faith is under threat by those who say that the clear teaching of the Lord can be ignored for pastoral reasons.

I listened to retreat given by Ven. Fulton Sheen. He said that our age is the fourth great crisis in the Church. He said that the crisis is about our relationship to the world. And he asked us whether we swim against the tide and stand with Christ or accept compromise and stand with the world. I stand with Christ and the constant teachings of his Church. I will not accept doctrinal compromises to please the world or to help the German Church keep hold of its church tax.

Amoris Laetitia will be revoked or clarified. I don’t think things will not be allowed to continue in this way. Perhaps Amoris Laetitia is a test of Faith. Maybe the Lord wants to see who will remain faithful to his teachings and who will accept worldly compromise. I thank the Lord for giving us St. John Paul II. I’ll not go wrong if I constantly remind myself of his magisterial teachings.

 

[Randolph]

You come blowing hot and strong on a forum with absolutely no other authority than your own emotional and dogmatic convictions. What is the point of that exactly? Some sort of solipsistic catharsis or therapy that doesn’t allow the real world to challenge your unreferenced personal biases .

You are wrong, my friend. I have posted my thoughts on the ambiguity of Amoris Laetitia on this very forum for over a year now. I just don’t want to rehash it with you. You are just not worth my time. I wish you well…

 

[Blue_Horizon]

I think the Holy Father endorsed the Argentines, not the Maltese. As I understand it, the Maltese “implementation” of AL is more “progressive” than the Argentine implementation. The latter envisioned extraordinary circumstances discerned with a priest. The former seems to leave it to the conscience of each couple. I could be wrong.

Have you read these docs?
Maltese Bishops Guidelines:
ms.maltadiocese.org/WEBSITE/2017/PRESS%20RELEASES/Norms%20for%20the%20Application%20of%20Chapter%20VIII%20of%20AL.pdf

Cardinal Baldisseri, on behalf of Pope Francis, sent a letter to the Maltese Bishops thanking them for their correct interpretation of AL:
irishcatholic.ie/article/world-news-brief-77

If we want to comment intelligently on the issue we have to read the documents for ourselves not robotically read the spin of others.

The Maltese bishops cannot be reasonably read to say that the guiding priest in the discernment process has to obey the conscience of the involved couple.
However he may, if he chooses to in objectively deserving cases, allow Communion to irregulars failed by the Annulment process.
Nothing too outlandish there.
The more difficult aspect for some is that they also see no intrinsic reason why sexual activity must always be prohibited as well if there are good reasons that suggest this disorder be tolerated given present conditions.

 

[Rau]

…The more difficult aspect for some is that they also see no intrinsic reason why sexual activity must always be prohibited as well if there are good reasons that suggest this would not be helpful.

I think it is because of the belief that the first marriage bond continues. Of course, if that bond is in fact null, it might be better for this to be determined eg. via the accompaniment process.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Amoris Laetitia will be revoked or clarified.

I don’t think things will not be allowed to continue in this way. Perhaps Amoris Laetitia is a test of Faith.
So the Pope’s understanding of the faith is mistaken not yours?
And this is based on your superior pastoral experience, theological education and native intelligence which the Pope does not possess - to say nothing of your charism of infallibility?

Please give us a break .

Maybe the Lord wants to see who will remain faithful to his teachings and who will accept worldly compromise. I thank the Lord for giving us St. John Paul II. I’ll not go wrong if I constantly remind myself of his magisterial teachings.

Me, I’ll just go with what Jesus said about following the living Pope not dead one’s who cannot speak or contradict personal lay views of what is in harmony in later ages and what is not.

 

[Dempsey1919]

Me, I’ll just go with what Jesus said about following the living Pope

Jesus said no such thing. I challenge you to find ONE Scripture verse that orders to follow a Pope who ignores the teachings of Jesus Christ and his Apostles. You’re an extreme ultramontanist.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Jesus said no such thing. I challenge you to find ONE Scripture verse that orders to follow a Pope who ignores the teachings of Jesus Christ and his Apostles. You’re an extreme ultramontanist.

Ok, so if Pope Francis is not the Pope that God expects us to follow in confusing times which of the 250 odd deceased ones should we follow instead and how would we know for sure what they would say under modern conditions and problems they never actually encountered before?

If you believe that Tradition is like the Bible and, as Protestant’s affirm, can be personally interpreted similarly independently of the living Magisterium then there really is nothing more to say.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

I think it is because of the belief that the first marriage bond continues. Of course, if that bond is in fact null, it might be better for this to be determined eg. via the accompaniment process.

As observed previously the discernment process, amongst other things, looks to have has been instituted to incorporate irregular Catholics failed by the Annulment process.
I have never seen any indication that it has any similar canonical function whatsoever.

However it may similarly incorporate some irregulars to Communion by other means.

 

[Dempsey1919]

Ok, so if Pope Francis is not the Pope that God expects us to follow in confusing times

Pope Francis is a cause of confusion. He allowed AL to be released and refuses to answer the dubia. Francis has the moral obligation to hand down what he received and confirm his brethren. He appears to be doing neither of these tasks. Since Pope Francis won’t answer the questions, I’ll go searching for answers from his immediate predecessors. Thankfully, Pope St John Paul II answered the questions decades ago. I’d remind you that John Paul is not a dead pope - he’s a canonised Saint and his teaching is relevant. A couple of rigged synods and a footnote cannot revoke the teachings of John Paul because he confirmed the teachings of Christ.

 

[irenaeus1]

You mean shining a light on passive aggression and unjustified dogmatism against Pope Francis is unchristian .

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a Catholic petitioning the pope for clarity on any doctrinal teaching. If the Church teaches A, and the pope teaches B which appears (note that I say appears) to contradict or negate portions of A, it is quite understandable that one would ask for clarity since Church teaching cannot be contradictory. It is fair to ask how the apparent contradiction is to be reconciled; it is fair to ask whether A is still true or has it somehow been abrogated; it is fair to ask whether teaching B has been misunderstood. It is fair and does not make one who poses the question to be showing passive aggression and unjustified dogmatism against the pope.

 

[irenaeus1]

Me, I’ll just go with what Jesus said about following the living Pope not dead one’s who cannot speak or contradict personal lay views of what is in harmony in later ages and what is not.

So you won’t think my position to be showing passive aggression and unjustified dogmatism against the pope once Pope Francis is dead… ok, good to know.

 

[irenaeus1]

Ok, so if Pope Francis is not the Pope that God expects us to follow in confusing times which of the 250 odd deceased ones should we follow instead and how would we know for sure what they would say under modern conditions and problems they never actually encountered before.

What is so different and confusing about marriage, divorce, and remarriage than when Popes JPII and Benedict XVI specifically addressed his topic? What modern conditions and problems exist now that didn’t exist just a decade or two ago?

 

[irenaeus1]

Can’t be that, as the Pope explicitly endorsed the Argentinian bishops’ restatement of the accompaniment process, and living as brother and sister was not a requirement.

I understand that that is what was reported based on a leaked letter from the pope regarding a draft version of the Argentinian bishops’ implementation of AL, but I wouldn’t consider that so weighty just as I wouldn’t take a private conversation of a pope who appeared to deny the divinity of Christ as an interpretation of Church teaching. The actual text of AL is what needs to be looked at, and an official response as to its proper interpretation is what is being sought by the numerous petitions as well as by the dubia. This is precisely why numerous bishops, archbishops, cardinals, and bishops’ conferences have said that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics who do not pledge to live in complete continence cannot to be admitted to Holy Communion. They have often said this not as one option among many that AL allows as a matter of prudential implementation, but have specifically stated that AL does not break from Catholic teaching and does not allow for such admission to Holy Communion by those in this situation.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Pope Francis is a cause of confusion. He allowed AL to be released and refuses to answer the dubia. Francis has the moral obligation to hand down what he received and confirm his brethren. He appears to be doing neither of these tasks. Since Pope Francis won’t answer the questions, I’ll go searching for answers from his immediate predecessors. Thankfully, Pope St John Paul II answered the questions decades ago. I’d remind you that John Paul is not a dead pope - he’s a canonised Saint and his teaching is relevant. A couple of rigged synods and a footnote cannot revoke the teachings of John Paul because he confirmed the teachings of Christ.

I dont think you understand what it means to be Pope and that he answers to no one.
I would think the cause of your confusion is your less than stellar lay theological education, an inability to walk in darkness and an excess love of uniformity.

Nor do you seem to understand it is traditionally well accepted that not answering Dubia is a perectly acceptable answer. All previous Popes have done the same including your pin up boy JPII . What is not traditionally polite and acceptable is that C. Bourke got the pip and is now working up the media and the laity who know no better (that includes you by the looks of it) instead of working this through by other non public means.

Me, in confusing times I know God simply wants us to follow the living Magisterium right or wrong for where Peter is there is his Church. God punishes noone for following His appointed leader even in the unlikely event he is “wrong” whatever that might mean in this context.

You by all means follow your own private version of Tradition in your intellectual and theological “wisdom” against the actual Pope and see what fruits your “truth” eventually earns you over obedience to Gods appointed .

 

[Blue_Horizon]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a Catholic petitioning the pope for clarity on any doctrinal teaching. If the Church teaches A, and the pope teaches B which appears (note that I say appears) to contradict or negate portions of A, it is quite understandable that one would ask for clarity since Church teaching cannot be contradictory. It is fair to ask how the apparent contradiction is to be reconciled; it is fair to ask whether A is still true or has it somehow been abrogated; it is fair to ask whether teaching B has been misunderstood. It is fair and does not make one who poses the question to be showing passive aggression and unjustified dogmatism against the pope.

Hah, petitioning for clarity.
You mean baying for retraction, who are you and C. Bourke trying to kid.
CB is not Pope, you are not Pope, so lets stop the Pontificating .

 

[Dempsey1919]

CB is not Pope, you are not Pope, so lets stop the Pontificating .

I wish Pope Francis would start Pontificating…instead of insulting Catholics for being ‘neo-pelegians’ who breed like rabbits and who can’t stop falling into ‘coprophilia.’ I didn’t know what ‘coprophilia’ was until Pope Francis used the word - at least he’s teaching me something.