Author Topic: Cardinal Burke: Cardinals could take a "Formal Act of Correction" (Read 12511 times)

Incredulous · « **Reply #75 on:** December 01, 2016, 02:03:12 AM »

Quote from: poche

Where does infallibility of the Pope on matters pertaining to doctrine and morals fit into all of this?

I think an encyclical is speaking "ex cathedra", from the Seat?

Now funny you should mention that, because St. Pope Pius X's encyclical, Pascendi Gregis, would be in the same category.

If you listen to this encyclical, Francis's docuмented modernism has made himself anathema.

He has put himself outside the Church because he has blatantly violated this teaching.

When Francis says he doesn't believe in a Catholic God, he's anathema.

And there are many, many other things Francis has done like this.

Stubborn · « **Reply #76 on:** December 01, 2016, 05:22:09 AM »

Quote from: Clemens Maria

By the way, it is NOT "common doctrine" that a pope can fall into heresy. St. Robert Bellarmine, a Doctor of the Church, held that it would not be possible.

St. Robert held *the opinion* that it would not be possible.

That is all.

Stubborn · « **Reply #77 on:** December 01, 2016, 05:40:24 AM »

Quote from: Geremia

Quote from: Clemens Maria
Big difference between common doctrine and common opinion. An opinion is not Church doctrine.
What do you mean by "common doctrine"?

Here, "common doctrine" simply means the pope is not immune from any sin, including the sin of heresy.

Pope Paul IV taught "The Formal Act of Correction" in "cuм ex Apostolatus Officio" when he said that the pope "may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith. Remembering also that, where danger is greater, it must more fully and more diligently be counteracted."

cuм ex, as far as I know, is deemed infallible by all the sedevacantists. As such, this teaching demonstrates infallibly that a pope can indeed deviate from the faith, and our instruction is to contradict him as those cardinals are doing, not declare or presume him to have lost his office on account of his sins.

s2srea · « **Reply #78 on:** December 01, 2016, 10:31:40 AM »

Quote from: Alexandria

Quote from: Ladislaus
Too bad they let slide the myriad "errors" made by Francis' predecessors.

Thanks for the laugh.

Yep... sure am sad nobody else but you two have a far deeper and learned understanding of the Faith than His Grace :rolleyes: Funny how sedevecantists seem to find the need to read and comment so consistently on matters in the hierarchy (not to mention their need to throw in their continual snarky comments... its almost as if they have to continually convince themselves of their uncomfortable position)

Mark 79 · « **Reply #79 on:** December 01, 2016, 12:41:36 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous

Quote from: Ladislaus
Too bad they let slide the myriad "errors" made by Francis' predecessors.

I fully expect the Church to prosecute those "errors" in the future:

The question still to be determined... is the canonical validity of their offices?

Yes! Cadaver synods of the post-V2 offenders!

Mark 79 · « **Reply #80 on:** December 01, 2016, 12:45:43 PM »

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.

As welcome as Cdl. Burke's criticism is, it has the odor of sour grapes. Recall that then Abp Burke consecrated a trans-sɛҳuąƖ to the religious state. What waves did he make before he was sacked from the Rota and given the Bugnini treatment?

Alexandria · « **Reply #81 on:** December 01, 2016, 03:30:17 PM »

Quote from: Mark 79

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.

As welcome as Cdl. Burke's criticism is, it has the odor of sour grapes. Recall that then Abp Burke consecrated a trans-sɛҳuąƖ to the religious state. What waves did he make before he was sacked from the Rota and given the Bugnini treatment?

That's right, he did, didn't he?

Thanks for reminding me about that.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #82 on:** December 01, 2016, 09:09:36 PM »

I find it at least curious that there are two hot topics swirling around Pope Francis lately, both of his own making.

One is the topic of this thread, regarding his heretical ramblings found in Amoris Laetitia. The other is his scandalous commiseration (to put it mildly) with the Lutherans. But what grabs my attention is that the two are not unrelated.

In fact, the very points of contention the 4 cardinals raise are very closely tied to the heresies of Martin Luther especially in regards marriage, confession, repentance and the appropriate reception of the sacraments.

One might even say that Francis has compromised his faith (ostensibly the Catholic faith) in such ways as to make him a de facto Lutheran.

Not entirely unrelated is the way Luther changed Rom iii. 28 by adding the word "alone." Well, actually, he changed more than one word. He also changed the grammar of the sentence from "by faith" to "of faith" and "of the law" to "by the law."

[28] For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law. (DRV)

‘We hold that man is justified without works by the law of faith alone’. (Luther's version)

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #83 on:** December 02, 2016, 12:43:13 AM »

Have you seen this quote?

Quote from: Francis

http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2016/06/pope-francis-was-right.html

"I believe that the intentions of Luther were not wrong. He was a reformer. Perhaps some methods were not right, but at that time, when we read the story by [Ludwig von] Pastor - a German Lutherans who converted and became a Catholic - we see that the Church was not exactly a worthwhile model: it was corruption, worldliness, attachment to money and power. Therefore, he protested. He was intelligent and took a step forward and justified why he did it. Today we are unified as Protestants and Catholics on the doctrine of justification in agreement, and on this very important point, he was not wrong. He made a medicine for the Church, then he consolidated this medicine to a discipline, ito make it a way, a belief. And then Zwingli, Calvin had these principles behind them: ' cuius regio eius religio.' We must put ourselves in the history of that time. It is not easy to understand. Then things have gone further. This docuмent on justification is one of the richest. There are divisions, even in the Lutheran Church there is a lack of unity. The diversity is what has perhaps been so bad for us, and now we are looking for the way to meet after 500 years. I believe that we need to pray together in the first place. Secondly, we need to work for the poor, the refugees, many people suffering, and finally that the theologians may study together ... That's a long way. I once jokingly said: I know, when the day of full unity will be: The day after the return of the Lord. We do not know when the Holy Spirit will effect this grace. Meanwhile, however, we must work together for peace. "

Geremia · « **Reply #84 on:** December 02, 2016, 08:50:47 AM »

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora

Have you seen this quote?
Quote from: Francis

http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2016/06/pope-francis-was-right.html

"I believe that the intentions of Luther were not wrong. He was a reformer. Perhaps some methods were not right, but at that time, when we read the story by [Ludwig von] Pastor - a German Lutherans who converted and became a Catholic - we see that the Church was not exactly a worthwhile model: it was corruption, worldliness, attachment to money and power. Therefore, he protested. He was intelligent and took a step forward and justified why he did it. Today we are unified as Protestants and Catholics on the doctrine of justification in agreement, and on this very important point, he was not wrong. He made a medicine for the Church, then he consolidated this medicine to a discipline, ito make it a way, a belief. And then Zwingli, Calvin had these principles behind them: ' cuius regio eius religio.' We must put ourselves in the history of that time. It is not easy to understand. Then things have gone further. This docuмent on justification is one of the richest. There are divisions, even in the Lutheran Church there is a lack of unity. The diversity is what has perhaps been so bad for us, and now we are looking for the way to meet after 500 years. I believe that we need to pray together in the first place. Secondly, we need to work for the poor, the refugees, many people suffering, and finally that the theologians may study together ... That's a long way. I once jokingly said: I know, when the day of full unity will be: The day after the return of the Lord. We do not know when the Holy Spirit will effect this grace. Meanwhile, however, we must work together for peace. "

How does reforming "corruption, worldliness, attachment to money and power" imply Luther's "doctrine of justification" "was not wrong"?
Francis is clearly at least a material heretic.

Incredulous · « **Reply #85 on:** December 02, 2016, 09:57:46 AM »

Quote from: Mark 79

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.

As welcome as Cdl. Burke's criticism is, it has the odor of sour grapes. Recall that then Abp Burke consecrated a trans-sɛҳuąƖ to the religious state. What waves did he make before he was sacked from the Rota and given the Bugnini treatment?

Please copy my full quotes.

I can see on my particular judgement, in the Book of Life, it being read:

Incredulous... on such and such date, you said "f Church history".

What do you have to say for yourself on that? :thinking:

Thank you.

Incredulous · « **Reply #86 on:** December 02, 2016, 10:00:24 AM »

Quote from: Alexandria

Quote from: Mark 79
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.

As welcome as Cdl. Burke's criticism is, it has the odor of sour grapes. Recall that then Abp Burke consecrated a trans-sɛҳuąƖ to the religious state. What waves did he make before he was sacked from the Rota and given the Bugnini treatment?

That's right, he did, didn't he?

Thanks for reminding me about that.

There are varying views of what he did in this case.

The trans-nun had been in the convent for 18 years.

Do you think it was a blatant support of transgender?

Incredulous · « **Reply #87 on:** December 02, 2016, 10:04:39 AM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

I find it at least curious that there are two hot topics swirling around Pope Francis lately, both of his own making.

One is the topic of this thread, regarding his heretical ramblings found in Amoris Laetitia. The other is his scandalous commiseration (to put it mildly) with the Lutherans. But what grabs my attention is that the two are not unrelated.

In fact, the very points of contention the 4 cardinals raise are very closely tied to the heresies of Martin Luther especially in regards marriage, confession, repentance and the appropriate reception of the sacraments.

One might even say that Francis has compromised his faith (ostensibly the Catholic faith) in such ways as to make him a de facto Lutheran.

Not entirely unrelated is the way Luther changed Rom iii. 28 by adding the word "alone." Well, actually, he changed more than one word. He also changed the grammar of the sentence from "by faith" to "of faith" and "of the law" to "by the law."

[28] For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law. (DRV)

‘We hold that man is justified without works by the law of faith alone’. (Luther's version)

And what a "party animal" he was!

Luther died in a brothel with his at the toilet.

Trying to find the saintly source on this?

Geremia · « **Reply #88 on:** December 02, 2016, 10:08:43 AM »

Quote from: Mark 79

then Abp Burke consecrated a trans-sɛҳuąƖ to the religious state.

What is his name, do you know? And where is he? That is certainly scandalous, to say the least, even if the consecration were valid.

Mark 79 · « **Reply #89 on:** December 02, 2016, 12:42:28 PM »

Quote from: Geremia

Quote from: Mark 79
then Abp Burke consecrated a trans-sɛҳuąƖ to the religious state.
What is his name, do you know? And where is he? That is certainly scandalous, to say the least, even if the consecration were valid.

It wasn't information that I wanted to archive.

Likely a search will find what you ask. Try searching: Burke consecrated transgendered man nun

The second hit is this: http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php?a=topic&t=4208