Author Topic: Cardinal Burke: Cardinals could take a "Formal Act of Correction" (Read 12516 times)

poche · « **Reply #45 on:** November 28, 2016, 09:58:41 AM »

Quote from: Geremia

Quote from: poche
Quote from: Geremia
Quote from: TKGS
If Bergoglio is the pope, then all you people need to stop condemning his teachings and embrace them, no matter how un-Catholic they are and you need to start condemning Burke & Company.
Cdl. Burke et al. are not contradicting Amoris Lætitia; they are merely asking for clarification. I'm not sure why some are calling their "dubia" a "formal act of correction."

It seems the 4 cardinals are simply abiding by "Lex dubia non obligat" ("A doubtful law does not bind").

As in the Blessed Virgin when she asked the angel. "How will this come to be since I do not know man?" when the angel told her that she was to become the mother of Jesus.
How is that related to what you quoted?

Both are requests for clarification.

Geremia · « **Reply #46 on:** November 29, 2016, 10:20:16 PM »

Quote from: LifeSiteNews

Dubia ‘could lead’ Pope to remove four Cardinals’ red hats: Dean of Vatican’s top appeals court

MADRID, November 29, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – While the dubia of four Cardinals concerning clarification of Amoris Laetitia spreads wider and wider ripples in the Vatican and worldwide, the dean of the Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota, the highest appeals court of the Church, says that they might lose their Cardinalate.

“The action of the Holy Spirit cannot be doubted,” he says. “[The Cardinals] question not one synod but two! The ordinary and the extraordinary,” Mons. Vito Pinto explained during a conference in the Ecclesiastical University of San Dámaso in Madrid, Spain.

The four Cardinals, Walter Brandmüller, Raymond Burke, Carlo Caffarra, and Joachim Meisner, asked Pope Francis for clarification on September 19, and then went public with their concerns earlier this month when Francis failed to answer.

“Which Church do these Cardinals defend?” Pinto reproaches. “The Pope is faithful to the doctrine of Christ.”

“What they have done is a very serious scandal that could lead the Holy Father to remove them from the Cardinalate, as it has sometimes happened in Church history,” Pinto expounds.

The Cardinalate – unlike the deaconate, priestly, or bishop’s ordination – does not entail an ontological change in the individual, but is an office conferred by the Pope. Therefore the Church speaks of “creating” Cardinals who join the College of Cardinals. They serve principally as helpers - in Latin, “hinges” (cardines) - to the Pope in ruling the Church. Therefore, they could theoretically be removed from their positions and return to being “simple” bishops or archbishops.

Mons. Vito Pinto affirms that the Pope has not directly answered their dubia but “indirectly he has told them that they only see in white or black, when in the Church there are shades of colors.” Pinto referred to multiple instances in which Pope Francis stated that life is not black and white but grey.

In the same conference, Mons. Pinto recalls, referring to Catholic “remarried” divorcees, how the center of Francis’ message is that the Church needs to accept the injured and fallen: “A nun told me that there are people divorced or living together who are communicating. And what should the Church do, say ‘yes, you may’ and ‘no, you may not’? Pope Francis wants a Church that is very close to the people.”

For Mons. Pinto the only solution – and the key to Francis’ pontificate – is acceptance, what he calls “mercy.” “In our time the Bride of Christ prefers to use the medicine of mercy and not wield the weapons of severity. The Catholic Church wishes to show herself to be a kind mother to all, patient and full of mercy to the children separated from her.”

poche · « **Reply #47 on:** November 29, 2016, 11:31:11 PM »

Cardinal George Pell has come to the support of the four cardinals who have submitted dubia about the interpretation of Amoris Laetitia.

Following an address to an audience in London, the Australian cardinal was asked whether he agreed with the questions the cardinals had asked Pope Francis. He replied: “How can you disagree with a question?” He added, however, that the questions were “significant.”

During his talk, Cardinal Pell had spoken at length about the proper understanding of conscience in relation to moral law. While acknowledging the primacy of conscience, he cited the concern of Blessed John Henry Newman about a “miserable counterfeit” of conscience that promotes “the right of self-will.”

A conscience must be properly informed, the cardinal said. “When a priest and a penitent are trying to discern the best way forward in what is known as the internal forum,” he said, they should always refer to the moral laws set forth by the Church. “The idea that you can somehow discern that moral truths should not be followed or should not be recognized is absurd,” he said.

Cardinal Pell pointedly remarked that Catholics are sometimes advised to follow their own consciences on questions involving sɛҳuąƖ morality. It is telling, he said, that the same advice is not given to those who harbor racist attitudes, or who deny an obligation to assist the poor.

For those who are interested in understanding the Church’s teachings on moral issues, Cardinal Pell strongly recommended Veritatis Splendor and Evangelium Vitae, two “great encyclicals” of St. John Paul II. Critics of Pope Francis have observed that those two encyclicals were largely overlooked in Amoris Laetitia.

Cardinal Pell said that many faithful Catholics have been “unnerved” by recent developments within the Church. He said this was a result of the widespread confusion about the authority of moral law.

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=30066

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #48 on:** November 30, 2016, 04:17:59 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: Incredulous
f Church history, this should be done. It should be on the record that some Cardinals and Bishops formally opposed the "Destroyer" pope.[/color]

Too little. Too late. 99% of the destruction has already been done. This latest is the tip of the iceberg and these "Cardinals and Bishops" have been asleep at the switch, if not accomplices in the destruction, the entire time.

Correct. And the destruction will continue because of the failure on the part of "conservatives" in general (including the SSPX current leadership) to understand the apostate Roman "Profession of Faith". I will quote once more its last and only paragraph which is not dogma (and which ABL warned about):

Quote

Moreover, I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/docuмents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_1998_professio-fidei_en.html

My husband and I have tried to warn about this for years. This "Profession of Faith" has been declared by Rome to be the only "non negotiable" condition for the SSPX et al in order to be "recognized" them. Since they cannot define their "teachings", they have come up with a solution that binds the clergy to accept them and through them, the faithful. We have said before that "Amoris Laetitia" is an act of the authentic Magisterium which Rome does not "intend to proclaim by a definitive act" but Catholics have "to adhere with religious submission of will and intellect" as "teaching" from the Roman Pontiff "or the College of Bishops"

The four Cardinals have signed this modern "Profession of Faith". I'll repeat that such "PF" is a sin against the First Commandment because it demands "religious submission of will and intellect" to man, on the authority of man. Truth has nothing to do with it.

On another thread http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/SECRET-SPECIAL-CHAPTER-OF-NEO-FSSPX you said:
"I'm sorry, but this is TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC DOCTRINE".

You are one of the few members I really admire for your knowledge of the faith. How is it that you could not see this? I hope that the current events and threats from the Romans to punish the four Cardinals for questioning a "magisterial" docuмent help you understand the gravity and danger of what you defended before. God bless.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #49 on:** November 30, 2016, 04:30:10 AM »

This headline should be helpful.

http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/head-of-vatican-court-cdl.-burke-could-be-stripped-of-red-hat

Stubborn · « **Reply #50 on:** November 30, 2016, 05:11:05 AM »

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora

The four Cardinals have signed this modern "Profession of Faith". I'll repeat that such "PF" is a sin against the First Commandment because it demands "religious submission of will and intellect" to man, on the authority of man. Truth has nothing to do with it.

This is new, it only makes sense for the NO to require submission to it's heresies through solemnly vowing blind obedience to man.

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora

This headline should be helpful.

http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/head-of-vatican-court-cdl.-burke-could-be-stripped-of-red-hat

The headline reads: Head of Vatican Court: Cdl. Burke Could Be Stripped of Red Hat

I was wondering why the NO steam roller hasn't made this happened yet.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #51 on:** November 30, 2016, 06:30:20 AM »

IMO, Rome doesn't expect the Cardinals to go too far. I personally don't think they have what it takes. It would help the "merciful" Romans to give them a chance to come back to the "fold" repentant so no one else dares to question the "authentic magisterium" again. Think about it, the SSPX bishops are mute and they don't have the Red Hat.

The Cardinals will be as ineffective as the SSPX unless they use dogma as dogma, their only weapon against them because Authority is subject to Truth. They should use dogma (Truth) to resist the College of Bishops to their face.

Stubborn · « **Reply #52 on:** November 30, 2016, 06:57:44 AM »

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora

IMO, Rome doesn't expect the Cardinals to go too far. I personally don't think they have what it takes. It would help the "merciful" Romans to give them a chance to come back to the "fold" repentant so no one else dares to question the "authentic magisterium" again. Think about it, the SSPX bishops are mute and they don't have the Red Hat.

The Cardinals will be as ineffective as the SSPX unless they use dogma as dogma, their only weapon against them because Authority is subject to Truth. They should use dogma to resist the College of Bishops to their face.

As a rule, NewRome has used dissenters to make examples of. Yes, at the moment the dissenting cardinals are getting the chance to repent, but all they need to do is push the issue a little too far or say the wrong thing one time, then expect the NO steam roller to publicly and efficiently smash them for all to behold.

MMagdala · « **Reply #53 on:** November 30, 2016, 09:14:09 AM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora
IMO, Rome doesn't expect the Cardinals to go too far. I personally don't think they have what it takes. It would help the "merciful" Romans to give them a chance to come back to the "fold" repentant so no one else dares to question the "authentic magisterium" again. Think about it, the SSPX bishops are mute and they don't have the Red Hat.

The Cardinals will be as ineffective as the SSPX unless they use dogma as dogma, their only weapon against them because Authority is subject to Truth. They should use dogma to resist the College of Bishops to their face.

As a rule, NewRome has used dissenters to make examples of. Yes, at the moment the dissenting cardinals are getting the chance to repent, but all they need to do is push the issue a little too far or say the wrong thing one time, then expect the NO steam roller to publicly and efficiently smash them for all to behold.

...which is what the ancient Romans liked to do: crucifixions as public examples for anyone else considering opposing The Empire.

Hmmm.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #54 on:** November 30, 2016, 09:46:23 AM »

Very timely and welcome article by Pro. Roberto de Mattei:

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/11/majestic-lecture-by-prof-roberto-de.html#more

Geremia · « **Reply #55 on:** November 30, 2016, 10:30:03 AM »

Quote from: poche

Cardinal George Pell … replied: “How can you disagree with a question?”

Amen! Deo gratias someone points out the obvious, as the Modernists simply refuse to recognize reality, facts, and truth.

Geremia · « **Reply #56 on:** November 30, 2016, 10:33:17 AM »

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora

This headline should be helpful.

http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/head-of-vatican-court-cdl.-burke-could-be-stripped-of-red-hat

For those who can read Spanish, the original article is: https://infocatolica.com/?t=noticia&cod=27894

I posted the related LSN article above.

Geremia · « **Reply #57 on:** November 30, 2016, 11:31:06 AM »

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora

IMO, Rome doesn't expect the Cardinals to go too far. I personally don't think they have what it takes. It would help the "merciful" Romans to give them a chance to come back to the "fold" repentant so no one else dares to question the "authentic magisterium" again. Think about it, the SSPX bishops are mute and they don't have the Red Hat.

The Cardinals will be as ineffective as the SSPX unless they use dogma as dogma, their only weapon against them because Authority is subject to Truth. They should use dogma (Truth) to resist the College of Bishops to their face.

I read an interesting article regarding whether the 4 cardinals are following a plan for deposing Francis, but he argues this would not be possible as the vast, vast majority of cardinals have lost the Faith and are Modernist.

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #58 on:** November 30, 2016, 11:50:01 AM »

A Nun was quoted that Pope Francis wanted a Church close to town.
Meaning close to hell.

Clemens Maria · « **Reply #59 on:** November 30, 2016, 01:31:11 PM »

A true pope cannot be "corrected" when exercising his office such as publishing an encyclical letter. That kind of thinking trashes the dogma of papal infallibility. Either he is the pope and everything he proposes for the whole Church to believe is infallibly safe and correct or he is not the pope. It's a very simple concept. I'm not sure why so many otherwise intelligent Catholics are continuing on in this farce. Who benefits by pretending that a non-Catholic can be pope? What traditionalist would hesitate to call a hyper-liberal bishop or cardinal a non-Catholic? We see that all the time not only in the comment boxes but in the actual articles being produced by the Remnant, CFN, the Wanderer, etc. But when the same non-Catholic bishop/cardinal gets elevated to the papacy, all of a sudden he is Catholic again and he is a legitimate pope. I don't think so. The idea that someone can remain Catholic as long as he is not officially condemned is not a Catholic principle. As soon as a cleric makes known his opposition to the Church's doctrine, he has already separated himself from the Church. The only thing left to do after that is to officially make known the loss of office. In fact, it matters very little what any other cardinal thinks about the situation. We all have a personal obligation to separate from non-Catholic clerics. Even if it means suffering some temporal penalty.