P
phil19034
Guest
You are mis-understanding Cardinal Burke … He is actually defending the Pope
- Status
M
Micosil
Guest
I thought Cardinal Burke was defending the Holy Father…???
M
Memaw
Guest
AMEN, God Bless, Memaw
M
Memaw
Guest
He is!!! God Bless, Memaw
C
clmowry
Guest
I’m about 1/2 way through. So far, I don’t see anything that can remotely be considered new or controversial.
That said, it never surprises me how folks are able to read whatever they like into any writing.
Chuck
S
Sarah_B_Good
Guest
The irony here is that it is Cardinal Burke and other ultra-conservatives in the Church who are directly responsible for the over-reaction in the media about possible significant changes in Church doctrine due to their own extreme over-reaction to statements the Pope has made. When those with such high authority in the Church sound the alarm reacting with utter hysteria, how could the media possibly not conclude there might be something to these extreme reactions. Do we really need to hear more from Cardinal Burke? One would hope that in his new position he would have learned some humility. Apparently not.
A
alwayswill
Guest
by CARDINAL RAYMOND BURKE
"Pope Francis makes clear, from the beginning, that the post-synodal apostolic exhortation is not an act of the magisterium,
"In other words, the Holy Father is proposing what he** personally believes** is the will of Christ for His Church, but he does not intend to impose his point of view, nor to condemn those who insist on what he calls “a more rigorous pastoral care.”
ncregister.com/daily-news/amoris-laetitia-and-the-constant-teaching-and-practice-of-the-church/
What is the correct view of Amoris Laetitia?
Is it binding?
"Pope Francis makes clear, from the beginning, that the post-synodal apostolic exhortation is not an act of the magisterium,
"In other words, the Holy Father is proposing what he** personally believes** is the will of Christ for His Church, but he does not intend to impose his point of view, nor to condemn those who insist on what he calls “a more rigorous pastoral care.”
ncregister.com/daily-news/amoris-laetitia-and-the-constant-teaching-and-practice-of-the-church/
What is the correct view of Amoris Laetitia?
Is it binding?
A
Abiding_in_Love
Guest
Yes, we do need to hear more from Cardinal Burke, because he is a clear voice of truth, and he is a humble man. I’m not sure why you think his clarification on the Church’s teaching not changing means he is not humble. He’s trying to help.
1
1ke
Guest
What part of Cardinarl Burke’s explanation is unclear?
W
Wesrock
Guest
I’m about halfway through Amoris Laetitia. Is there anything new in regards to faith and morals in here? Certainly statements on the importance of the family and tying it into God’s plan, but my impression so far is that this is a pastorap documents, and an attempt at framing the conversation about family and marriage in an increasingly secularized world that seems to be doing away with the idea of marriage, perhaos even a prompt for pastors to discuss the good of family and marriage in their parish.
I know that doesn’t directly answer the question, but if there’s nothing really new in here, then is the question of it being absolutely binding or not really an issue?
And as a matter of binding in general, I wouldn’t opt for a strictly yes or no. Even if it’s not an infallible exercise of the Magisterium, it’s still teaching and pastoral guidance from the See of Rome, and should be treated with respect and from an authority. And even in that gray in-between area of infallible to completely personal views (and I have to say, an exhortation such as this shoupd be given far more weight than off-the-cuff remarks in interviews), there’s various degrees to which such teachings may be approached.
I know that doesn’t directly answer the question, but if there’s nothing really new in here, then is the question of it being absolutely binding or not really an issue?
And as a matter of binding in general, I wouldn’t opt for a strictly yes or no. Even if it’s not an infallible exercise of the Magisterium, it’s still teaching and pastoral guidance from the See of Rome, and should be treated with respect and from an authority. And even in that gray in-between area of infallible to completely personal views (and I have to say, an exhortation such as this shoupd be given far more weight than off-the-cuff remarks in interviews), there’s various degrees to which such teachings may be approached.
C
christofirst
Guest
From what I am reading, you will get as many answers to this question as there are theologians with different points of view. If what Pope Francis said in the exhortation was not authoritative and infallible, should we then just disregard it as we see fit?
When the Pope tells me something, I listen to him. When a Cardinal comments on something the Pope has told me, I consider that too.
When the Pope tells me something, I listen to him. When a Cardinal comments on something the Pope has told me, I consider that too.
D
dans0622
Guest
Hello,
Cardinal Burke can’t “bind” anyone to any perspective or understanding. His views are as worthy of consideration and acceptance as the argumentation he uses in applying his knowledge to the facts at hand is rational and persuasive.
Personally, I find much of what he says to be reasonable and accurate but I wouldn’t go so far as to say that *Amoris laetitia *is not an act of the magisterium.
Dan
C
clmowry
Guest
Sounds about right:
There is more or less a pecking order for “formality” in Papal writings.
It think it would follow the following form “most” to “least” formal.
Papal Encyclicals
Apostolic Exhortations
Ecclesiastical Letters
Apostolic Letters
anything else the pope happens to write.
I’m about 3/4 through the document, but I was really surprised when I was a movie scene quoted in the document! Not what I would normally expect to see in an Apostolic Exhortation.
In any case, I don’t think you can derive “Infallible” or “Authoritative” from the type of document.
When it comes to “Infallible” or “Authoritative” statements, I would offer the following:
If the Pope meant to issue an “Infallible” statement on the proclamation of a new teaching, you wouldn’t have to guess as to whether or not that’s what he had intended. He wouldn’t “slip it in” somewhere. It would be a really big deal. We would have probably heard arguments about the subject for a few decades (and most likely it would come in the form of an Encyclical.)
I don’t see any indication that he’s done anything like that with regard to this document. i.e. nothing new here.
That said, when it comes to faith and morals, I think it is reasonable and best to assume that what the Pope is writes for formal proclamation is “authoritative”.
As with pretty much all Apostolic Exhortations the Pope is offering us instructions on how he would like to see the Church take action with regard to a certain issue.
The approach we take with regard to how we promote any particular teaching can and should change with time and circumstance.
So far that’s all I see Papa Francis doing here.
That help at all?
Chuck
P
phil19034
Guest
Yes, the Cardinal is correct. Cardinal Burke is one the Church’s greatest canon lawyers.
Church documents and Canon Law are sometimes difficult for Americans to understand. The reason is: official Church documents always have built into them assumptions. For example, it is assumed that you will read this fully understanding Church teaching. The document (and Pope Francis) assumes it will be read from within Church teaching & understanding.
This is often difficult for Americans because American Law (unlike Canon Law) assumes nothing. Americans are taught when they write speeches, exhortations, etc. to assume nothing. However, that’s not what the Church does. The Church always assumes that a letter, exhortation, canon law, etc will always be understood within the context of the Magisterium.
I pray this is helpful.
God Bless
M
Michael_Francis
Guest
4 Threads now merged here on this same topic.
A
Abu
Guest
Of course it’s NOT “binding”, that is, mandatory”, except where previous doctrine may be repeated.
Cardinal Burke insists that faithful Catholics should receive the papal document respectfully, and says that they should not fall into “the erroneous tendency to interpret every word of the Pope as binding in conscience, which, of course, is absurd.” Cardinal Burke notes that near the outset of his apostolic exhortation, Pope Francis explicitly states that the document should not be regarded as an act of the magisterium.
C
christofirst
Guest
What about Cardinal Schonborn’s claim that the exhortation represents a development of doctrine? And when the Pope presents us with a teaching, should we always rush to whichever Cardinal goes along with our way of thinking, be it more traditional or progressive, in order to decide how we will receive, or relegate, the teaching?
A
Abu
Guest
When “development of doctrine” takes place, even if non-definitive (non-infallible), it requires intellectual assent (“loyal submission of the will and intellect”, Vatican II, *Lumen Gentium *25). There is no such development in Amoris Laetitia.
Often a dogma or doctrine is infallibly defined after the need is identified through a dispute over what should be believed (faith – the Trinity) or how we should act (morals – contraception).
In Mysterium Ecclesiae, (CDF, 1973, #5): “For this reason also it often happens that ancient dogmatic formulas and others closely connected with them remain living and fruitful in the habitual usage of the Church, but with suitable expository and explanatory additions that maintain and clarify their original meaning. In addition, it has sometimes happened that in this habitual usage of the Church certain of these formulas gave way to new expressions which, proposed and approved by the Sacred Magisterium, presented more clearly or more completely the same meaning.” This was seen in John XXIII”s opening address of Vatican II, using the words of St Vincent of Lerins, and Vatican I – “with the same meaning and the same sense.”
So to reemphasise what Cardinal Burke explained: “Pope Francis explicitly states that the document should not be regarded as an act of the magisterium.”
- Status