Sidebar
Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Cardinal Burke: Formal Correction Will Probably Take Place in 2017

LifeSiteNews‘ Lisa Bourne conducted an exclusive interview with Cardinal Raymond Burke in which she asked about the a timeline for the promised formal correction in the absence of a response from Pope Francis on the dubia related to Amoris Laetitia. Burke responded:

“The dubia have to have a response because they have to do with the very foundations of the moral life and of the Church’s constant teaching with regard to good and evil, with regard to various sacred realities like marriage and Holy Communion and so forth,” Burke said during a telephone interview.

Now of course we are in the last days, days of strong grace, before the Solemnity of the Nativity of Our Lord, and then we have the Octave of the Solemnity and the celebrations at the beginning of the New Year – the whole mystery of Our Lord’s Birth and His Epiphany – so it would probably take place sometime after that.”

The cardinal, who is the patron of the Sovereign Order of Malta, said the format of the correction would be “very simple.”

“It would be direct, even as the dubia are, only in this case there would no longer be raising questions, but confronting the confusing statements in Amoris Laetitia with what has been the Church’s constant teaching and practice, and thereby correcting Amoris Laetitia,” he said. [emphasis added]

A timeline that places the correction after the Epiphany means that the next step in this process will fall in 2017. Many Catholics devoted to the Fatima message have been increasingly concerned that 2017 — the 100th anniversary of our Lady’s final appearance to the three shepherd children and the Miracle of the Sun, which took place on October 13, 1917 — will usher in a chastisement in accordance with Our Lady’s various warnings through apparitions like Fatima, or the lesser known Akita warnings, the last of which also took place on October 13th of 1973.

At Akita, Our Lady is said to have told Sr. Agnes Sasagawa:

“The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres…churches and altars sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.”

In a video released last year before the second portion of the Synod on Marriage and Family, Cardinal Burke echoed the words of the Akita message (see time marker 26:35) when he said:

“If this means that cardinals will be opposed to cardinals, then we simply have to accept the fact that…that that’s the situation which we find ourselves. Certainly for my part, I don’t look for this kind of conflict, but…if in defending the truth of the faith I end up in a disagreement or a conflict with another cardinal what has to be primary to me is the truth of the faith and to, as a teacher of the faith, as a pastor of souls, to defend that truth.”

Whether or not the sort of chastisement many fear is imminent, we are unquestionably faced with deep and harmful divisions within the Church that are headed straight for a confrontation of historic proportions.

124 thoughts on “Cardinal Burke: Formal Correction Will Probably Take Place in 2017”

  1. A hauntingly beautiful photo of Cardinal Burke. It evokes a sense of artistic continuity with the Catholic understanding of truth and beauty.

    Reply
  2. This “chastisement” is a glorious opportunity to stand with our Lord and Savior, on his words, words the rest of the world, especially the Protestant world, have long ago denied.

    We are blessed to be elected to this generation.

    Reply
  3. I had a hunch there wouldn’t be a formal correction until after Christmas so this timeline seems to fit. Despite many calls for it to come soon, I think this is wise.

    Reply
  4. God bless these prelates, raised up by the Holy Ghost to defend the Truth of the Faith against errors being promulgated from the very summit of the Church. May Our Lady protect and defend them, and Saint Joseph guide them.

    Reply
    • That seems too far off and a bit inopportune.

      Perhaps January 25th…the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul…

      More opportune, don’t you think?

      Reply
      • I would say Jan. 10, Feast of the Holy Family, but that seems too soon. Jan. 25 or Feb. 22 seem to be more fitting.

        I don’t think Feb. 22 is too far off.

        It would be interesting to know the timetables of similar past processes in Church history. Not that the timetables were the same, but perhaps they were close.

        Reply
  5. As most of us suspected, the Christmas Season doesn’t seem like the ‘proper’ time for the formal correction, at the very least it would give an unfair amount of ‘negative media’ attention to the good Cardinal’s because the current Vatican PC machine would portray them as trying to “harm the Church and Pope Francis and at Christmas!” Furthermore, I am certain that they are aware that the average Catholic is clueless at best as to what is happening and this would cause them grief at Christmas, so they are not going to do that.

    My opinion only, but if it were me, I would not telegraph when I planned on issuing the Correction as those who support Amoris Laetitia have proven themselves to be rather unscrupulous in their methods. I would not be surprised to see the Good Cardinals, especially Burke, formally reprimanded (and even Canonically Penalized) by Pope Francis or one of his appointed surrogates prior to the end of the Christmas season, say around December 27th or 28th. Unless, of course, they are so drunk with power that they either do not perceive this as a real threat (doubtful) or that the Cardinals will back off if the right pressure, behind the scenes, is exerted.

    I guess 2 cents isn’t worth much, but there it is for now.

    Reply
    • Francis is in a difficult position, there’s no question of that. He’s backed himself in a corner, as he knows he cannot answer the dubia according to his true beliefs without acknowledging he has formally dissented from the Catholic faith. For him to try to formally penalize the four cardinals would be an almost unprecedented display of capriciousness and hubris, as anyone who actually pays attention would easily see that the cardinals would be punished for merely holding to the Catholic faith as it has always been practiced. And it would send political shockwaves throughout the Vatican and could end up turning those bishops and cardinals who are privately on the fence into full blown rebellion against Francis.

      Logic would suggest that a shrewd, politically savvy pontiff would never dare to do something so polarizing. But, then again, we are dealing with a pontiff known for his virulent temper and oversized ego, so I suppose it is impossible to rule anything out.

      Reply
      • I can’t see him publicly chastising the Cardinals, i.e. excommunicating them or taking away their red hats, as they are only upholding the orthodox Catholic Faith as instituted by Jesus Christ & upheld intact until VII. No Pope can rewrite the Ten Commandments or invent their pastoral discernment in such a way as to support the unrepentant in their sin. Neither can he say that we are the same as schismatics or even pagans. Christ came to found His Church which he did on the First Apostles & any other belief/tenet is not from Him.

        He has only two options – either retract on AL, or resign. Staying silent is not an option; his prime job is to proclaim the Truth and nothing but the Truth. The very fact that four Cardinals have had to ask for clarification on his Papa Exhortation so as not to confuse the faithful, his tenure in the Papal Office would be brought swiftly to an end if he were to either uphold that document or continue to ignore the Dubia/Formal Correction.

        Reply
        • “Staying silent is not an option”
          Of course it is. And it’s almost certainly the line the Holy Father will take.
          And he shall do so in order to see just how far the 4 cardinals will go.
          Ask yourself: if the correction is ignored, like the dubia have been ignored – what will the cardinals do then?
          Repeat the correction?
          And then what?
          That corner you’ve identified? It’s the corner the 4 cardinals are in.
          The Holy Father holds all the aces in this pack: he’s the Pope.

          Reply
          • If he is teaching against the Deposit of Faith & Magisterium as held since the time of the First Apostles he cannot be revered as pope, as he would visibly be seen to have removed himself from the True Faith. No Pope can change what Jesus has laid down. AL certainly aims to rewrite the Ten Commandments by changing the pastoral discernment of them. Like the Dubia the Commandments given by God to Moses are clearcut – you either keep them or you refuse to & thereby cut yourself off from Confession & the reception of Holy Communion. There is no middle ground. As Pope he has to uphold the dogma of the CC – AL doesn’t, & leaves everything open to personal interpretation which is anathema to the Catholic Faith.

          • Well, this is all very true but in a sense – so what? I don’t mean by that that it’s not important! I just mean what I was trying to say in my prior post:
            If the Holy Father refuses to respond even to a correction what do you think the 4 cardinals are going to be able to do about that?
            If you look at your response here it’s all about the Pope coming to recognize that he needs to change or else to go. My point was that he could very, very easily choose to do neither. And should he take that tactic I come back to my earlier question: what can the 4 cardinals do about that?
            Short answer: nothing.
            That’s the point I was making: the Holy Father isn’t in a corner – the 4 cardinals are. They’re the ones who are stuck. Because, having issued a correction that is deflected by the Curia and the Holy Father what do they do next? I’m not a Canon Lawyer but I think their options are seriously limited. They can’t continue issuing corrections, can they: that would turn rapidly into denunciations and will leave them open to the accusation of fomenting schism. Sure, they have the fulness of the Faith on their side, but once again, so what? What does that allow them to DO – apart from to console the beleagured faithful (which is important, yes). But they can’t set up a parallel Church, can they…

            Can you name me the last Supreme Pontiff who was deposed by a handful of cardinals? No, me neither. How about a Pope deposed by all of the Cardinals? I believe you have to go back to the Council of Constance 600 years ago when the three claimants to the See of Peter (including the valid one!) agreed to step aside and allow for a new election – when asked to do so by the Sacred College for the good of the Church. But that’s not the circumstance here, I’m afraid.

            Our 4 cardinals are banking on the Pope ‘blinking’ before they do.
            They’ve clearly underestimated the Jesuit.
            Unfortunately, your very sincere and very true reply does likewise.

          • Cardinal Burke has stated that the rationale behind what the cardinals are doing is to defend the truth. They don’t seem fazed by what the pope may, or may not, do.

            According to Burke, they have a duty and will execute that duty. What happens after that? That’s an unknown.

            It’s difficult to see how the issue can just die. If Pope Francis remains silent, that will only make things worse. Witness the Canadian bishops now practically giving their blessing to euthanasia.

          • All the machinations of some who have been called to shepherd the Lord’s flock but are instead leading them astray wounds the Lord’s Heart terribly.

          • Be sure that those holy defenders of the truth will suffer for it, like their Master. But they will be vindicated; if only after their deaths.

          • The Church always take the long view. This crisis may last a lot longer than we would think possible – in the end, sometime in the future, a new council will sweep away Francis and his errors. It’s the waiting and the frustration that are the hardest to bare for us.

          • We are waiting for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart to sort this mess out, because nobody on earth can. Keep praying.

          • I’m not so sure that God is not going to pull something out of the bag to support these holy cardinals, and protect (reform?) His Bride. Just sayin’.

          • It is true, that PF and his minions could remain silent and hope that the whole matter loses steam. However, you do not become a Cardinal by being obtuse. I believe there are many ways in which Cardinal Burke and others, if they so wish, can bring the matter to a head.

            Be not afraid! There are good lay men and women all over the world, good theologians and teachers and, may God bless them, good prelates who will Not allow error to prevail.

            Staying silent is a strategy but It is a weak strategy because PF, contrary to your position, does not hold all of the cards. In fact, all of Church tradition and teaching are on the side of those supporting the dubia. If it were not so do you not think that all of PF’s horses and all of PF’s men would have made a legitimate argument by now!

            As soon as the correction is made, a choice will be set and PF will either look foolish by remaining silent, or he will respond, at which time the second round will begin.

          • We don’t know what the cardinals will do after the formal correction. We don’t know what’s planned, and we don’t know exactly who will issue it with them? Cardinal Brandmuller, if his recent interview is any indication, may actually not be part of that. But Cardinal Burke recently said he personally knows of at least, what was it, 30? or so Cardinals who stand with them. What if 30 Cardinals and a host of bishops issue the correction together? Or, if the correction is ignored, perhaps then more will stand up? We don’t know what else is in store. Technically speaking, a general council could be called to resolve this matter, even at the protest of the Pope (it would be called an imperfect council in this case). This council, which the Pope would simply be unable to ignore, would have to deal with things. I don’t know what the plan is, but the Church is not defenseless, and if things got that serious, I suspect a majority, even a small majority, of Bishops would stand with the truth. Even if it’s not a majority, the number doesn’t matter. I suspect we have a schism coming, the largest since the protestant reformation. It’s going to hurt. I don’t see a way of avoiding it. At least Germany will split I would wager. The remaining Church after this schism may well be smaller. Ok. This is going to suck, and there is no painless way out of this. We need to prepare ourselves for what’s coming. Only a miracle will prevent such an outcome… so perhaps that’s what we need to pray for! https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/09d7cee2eaa564eed2e01405e03baf0dc298e311968f7bbb384bf332adca926a.jpg

          • Hmm. Yes. Well Our Lord knows what He’s doing but He hasn’t shared His plans with me. Perhaps you’re privy to them. I’m not.

          • Our Lord hasn’t shared His plans with the Pope and his lackeys either. With the aces He holds up His sleeve it’s possible for the tables to be turned in the twinkling of an eye.

            So it’s a bit premature to make definite pronouncements about who’s in the corner and who’s not.

          • You’ll find I was responding to Ana Milan’s post limiting the Holy Father’s choices to two. I suggested he had a third.

            But sure, if you want to go down the Quietistic route I’m happy to do so: God is in charge.

            Feels reassuringly pious, doesn’t it? But that’s all.

          • You may not know the specifics, but you know the general outcome.

            Error cannot prevail in the Church. It always gets rooted out eventually. Sometimes it takes awhile.

            We know Our Lord is mightily offended by the world in general, so things cannot continue on as they are for much longer.

            Abortion, “gay” marriage, euthanasia, contraception, divorce and remarriage, cohabitation, et cetera, are crying to Heaven for vengeance.

            One of these days it’s going to come to a head.

          • We have some clues in the Book of Revelation. Did you know that on 23 September 2017 “The Great Sign” of Rev. 12: 1-2 will appear astronomically above Jerusalem at 6:10 local time? That shows us where we are in the Apocalypse. There will be a schism and the true Church will have to go underground. There is a false prophet mentioned, and increasingly I think it’s PF. There will be martyrdom, war, famine, huge natural disasters. Get ready.

          • I’m sorry to say I agree with you, ardenjm. Silence is the only weapon Francis has, and he will use it. This is a very effective tactic – but along with the silence from Francis, there is a barrage of flack from his toadies around the world. So in effect there has been a response. And you are also correct. What if there is silence in the face of the correction? Only God’s Grace will move the majority of Bishops/priests to understand what is at stake and publicly stand for Truth.

            In the meantime we see the Alinsky tactics of demonizing the enemy and projecting victimhood on Francis as if he is the one being attacked instead of the Truth…it’s all very clear. By the way, this Alinsky method is exactly how the very powerful homosexual lobby got where they are – it’s all Alinsky.

            Dirty work.

        • I’ll put my vote on PF resigning by end of 2017. Not that I have any inside track, I don’t, just a hunch he won’t fight even 6 cardinals that have the courage to rebuke him. Make that 4 😉

          Reply
          • Hopefully before. I think all bullies are cowards & when the formal correction is issued there will be many more Cardinals/Bishops in line behind the Fab Four.

      • It would not surprise me if the man in white at the Vatican did come up with a punishment for asking for clarity from him. But it would not come direct from him but from one of his subordinates. Retribution is not something unknown in the history of the Vatican…

        Reply
      • He will resort again to the PF trick of never saying what he doesn’t mean. He uses Kasper and Marx for intellectual cover since they are such clever liars.

        Reply
    • If Francis were to remove them from the cardinalate before they made the correction, would that impact their ability to make a formal correction or would they still be able to do it due to their standing as bishops?

      Reply
      • As Bishops they certainly could still make a formal correction and indeed they would. Then we just get into the if PF was a manifest heretic at the time of the removal of the Red Hat etc….not pleasant any way you look at it.

        Reply
        • If he removed their red hats it would only pinpoint his own removal from the Catholic Faith, as the Cardinals are only upholding what Jesus Christ taught & the Sacraments he gave us through the First Apostles.

          Reply
      • Bishop St John Fisher by his actions repremanded King Henry VIII’s heresy-adultry. The Pope made him a Cardinal and sent him the red hat in hopes this would make Henry think twice about executing him; but the King said, “Let the Pope send the hat. He will find no head to put it on.”
        Historically, there were Bishops before there were Cardinals. Cardinal Burke et al. has sufficient authority to correct the Pope’s errors.

        Reply
    • I agree that it is risky, but I think it is good that Cardinal Burke announced this. It puts the pope and all his sycophants on notice that this issue is NOT going away and that these prelates are NOT going to back down.

      We will probably witness an escalation of attacks coming from the Vatican. I would bet that some there will have a Scrooge Christmas.

      So be it. They brought it on themselves.

      This is the work of the Holy Ghost. That needs to be repeated to one and all. What Cardinal Burke and his fellow bishops are doing is the work of the Holy Ghost.

      Those who oppose them oppose the Holy Ghost, not the other way around.

      Reply
        • St Athanasius was exiled as the ONLY orthodox bishop when, as one historian put it, “The Church woke up and found it was Arian.”
          But like Elijah against the priests of Baal on Mt Carmel, Athanasius prevailed with the power of Truth and the Holy Spirit.
          As Henry David Thoreau said, “Any man more right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one.”

          Reply
    • The Cardinals may well be bad mouthed by PF’s mouthpieces & I expect they are fully braced to be, but those men, though close to PF, have no power & the Dubia isn’t addressed to them. I am hoping that Cardinal Müller will find his voice & give the official CDF verdict on AL & uphold the Cardinals’ right to issue the Dubia in present circumstances. PF can’t tape everyone’s mouth that opposes the implementation of AL & if he attempts to do so will only get the hackles up of those who, up until now, have only shown complacency.

      Reply
      • Cardinal Muller? I suspect his heart is in the right place; is he ready to give up everything for the sake of the truth? The price is high to proclaim Truth these days. And yet it is our precious Lord Jesus who is The Way, The Truth, and The Life.

        Reply
    • You are correct, Father, that many Catholics – at least in my area don’t know about the dubia.

      I too wish that Cardinal Burke had not publicized when they are going to issue a correction – for his well-being. Many prayers for him and the slow- growing number of cardinals who support the dubia.

      Reply
      • Most people don’t care or sympathize with being merciful to those who “find themselves” sleeping with someone else’s wife.

        Reply
    • I agree with you Fr.!! I wouldn’t have given them even a ‘hint’ at what, when or where we would hurl a formal correction at the Pope, or maybe even that there WOULD be a formal correction coming.

      Reply
      • Of course they do, they are abiding by the Deposit of Faith and are not introducing novelties that directly contradict articles within the Deposit of Faith and having the temerity to saying both that Doctrine hasn’t been changed and that at the same time this is an authentic development (which is of course is not true as it is not consistent with prior teaching it is a rupture from it.)

        Reply
      • So did Jesus before Pilate and Caphias. It got him crucified, and that’s what’s going to happen to these good guys. They will of course be eventually vindicated, but that doesn’t help them, only us who Care about the Church and the Papacy. It may also help some of those “on the fence” decide who to follow according to Christ.

        Reply
  6. The Joker in this deck of cards, is Benedict XVI. Where is he and where does he stand?

    Should Francis answer the dubia? Is he in agreement with Francis’ silence on this matter? Benedict has been closely associated with the pontificates of both John Paul II and Francis and may even have written critical parts of Veritatis splendor and Familiaris consortio. Is Amoris laetitia a “development” of the theology in these documents or is it a clear rupture?

    Will Benedict sit by and watch silently as the Church is torn apart? His intervention in this issue could have enormous consequences and could be a game-changer.

    Reply
      • If the “H”-word is part of the correction, and the question of papal heresy arises, he’ll have little choice and neither will any other Catholic on the planet.

        A schism in the Church, ipso facto, means that one or other side must be chosen.

        This is not simply an academic debate about the wording of a document. There are potential juridical issues which go to the very heart of the nature of the papacy.

        Reply
        • Well, maybe.
          But heresy won’t be mentioned in the correction.
          And the correction will be ignored.

          That’s my bet, anyway, for what it’s worth.

          (And just to be clear I deplore this situation – as inevitable as it has become ever since the heresy of Modernism was insufficiently dealt with 100 years ago and took root within the Church…)

          Reply
          • The joint document sent to the pope by numerous scholars already employed the word “heretical,” along with “pernicious,” “contrary to Sacred Scripture,” “impious,” and “blasphemous.” There is no reason to believe the cardinals would not use similar language. That’s typical in things like this. The “correction” is probably already written and will no doubt contain scholarly language used by theologians.

          • Yes: but in the putative correction they now need to accuse the Pope of all of these things.

            Remind me who was the last Cardinal to formally accuse a Pope of heresy?

            I’m drawing a blank here…

          • The formal “correction” does not need to accuse the pope of heresy; it could merely accuse him of failing to defend the Faith against the errors that are spreading throughout the Church by false interpretations of Amoris Laetitia.

            Personally, I don’t believe that to be the proper way of going about this thing, but I don’t see why that could not be an option.

            Popes in the past have been publicly accused of heresy. Don’t know about “formally” or if specifically by cardinals. Certainly bishops and theologians have done so.

            The Abbe de Nantes publicly accused Pope Paul VI of heresy. And of course John XXII had his problems. Honorius and Liberius also come to mind.

            Several popes were resisted when they started doing crazy things. Pope Stephen VI and Sergius III were publicly opposed, by clergy and laity alike, for their erroneous rulings regarding Pope Formosus.

            That said, it does not matter whether this is the first time for something like this. Truth is truth, and the pope must conform his views to the truth. If his views are false, and that causes division in the Church, then someone needs to defend the truth and publicly oppose his errors.

          • I don’t there will be any accusations in the Correction. It will restate the questions in the dubia and then show what the correct answers are according to Christ’s Teaching, the Traditional teachings of the Church, Canon Law, and the infallible Magisterium.

            From what we know about Cardinal Burke, he is not in the business of personal comments or criticisms of anybody. He will speak plainly, simply, and in such a way that he will be upholding TRUTH – for all to see.

  7. Btw if there is a formal public correction, how are most Catholics in the pews going to get word of this public formal correction if the supermajority of ecclesiastics remain still silent? Think about how many in your Novus Ordo parishes have even heard of the Dubia. The only ones that know are your crazy marginalized Catholics. I think this might come down to the laity backing these cardinals by pushing this correction, once published.

    Reply
    • I think you make a very valid point.
      The correction will almost certainly be ignored publicly by the Holy Father and effectively ‘deflected’ by ignoring it by the Curia as well.
      As I ask below: what do the 4 cardinals think they’ll be able to do then, should that be the response? (A response that would be par for the course from this pontificate.)

      Reply
      • You assume that this matter will be confined to four cardinals versus the Pope for ever and ever, amen.

        The question is not “what will the 4 cardinals do?” The question is “what will the other 100+ cardinals do?” You appear to believe that the answer to this question is “nothing”.

        I see no justification for that assumption.

        Reply
        • No, I do consider the possibility of more Cardinals rallying to the 4 when I evoked the Council of Constance. But this really was the whole of the Sacred College acting in concert to undo a log jam.

          Let’s remind ourselves how many decades that log jam had existed for, though…

          So in that sense, this crisis still has a long time to run in my opinion.

          Also, I just don’t see any of the Cardinals taking the nuclear option on the Papacy. I think they’d rather just wait until God took him.

          Reply
          • The crisis may last awhile, but surely not all the same players will see the end result this side of eternity. After all, the pope is 80 now. He can’t last forever.

  8. May 13, A.D. 1917- Beginning of the apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima, Portugal

    October 13, A.D. 1917- Miracle of the Sun, end of the apparitions at Fatima

    June 12, A.D. 1973- Beginning of the apparitions of Our Lady at Akita, Japan

    October 13, A.D. 1973- End of the apparitions of Our Lady at Akita Japan

    March 13. A.D. 2013- Election of Pope Francis

    October 13, A.D. 2013- Forty years since Akita

    September 13, A.D. 2016- Three and a half months into the pontificate of Pope Francis

    November 20, A.D. 2016- Beginning of astronomical sign of the Woman Clothed with the Sun

    September 23, A.D. 2017- End of astronomical sign

    October 13, A.D. 2017- Hundredth anniversary of Fatima

    October 31, A.D. 2017- Five hundredth anniversary of the Protestant Revolt

    Reply
  9. He is completely attired in red. We all understand what that means. God bless every shepherd whose most precious treasure is Christ.

    Reply
  10. I will be surprised if Pope Francis reverses himself on Amoris Laetitia. And I would not be surprised if there were not folks in the Vatican at this very moment drafting an ambiguous and convoluted answer to the four Cardinals which they will claim to be definitive and declare the case closed.

    The year 2017 should be declared as a year of prayer for the Church to Our Lady of Fatima. Maybe the Cardinals can pick up on this.

    Reply
    • You could very well be right, Michael. Father Hunwicke’s blog comments section has some information about a “dubia” that Bishop Lefebvre sent to John Paul II. Apparently Cardinal Ratzinger answered, in part, but in a very unsatisfactory way. There were no direct links provided.

      Lest we forget, the Vatican has been using confusing, deliberately obfuscating language for decades. They can say a lot without saying any truth. The new ‘church’ is easily dazzled by fancy-sounding language.

      Reply
      • Exactly. What happened to following Jesus words, let your yes mean yes, your no, no. In both the new and old testament, yes means yes, and no means no. When we read Archbishop Sheen and other pre 1960 Catholic writers, we see simple direct truth. Ever since, ever more ambiguity. At this point most Catholics have no idea why they should be Catholic, since most everyone goes to heaven including atheists (according to Pope Francis). Thank God we have the Bible, Church tradition, the writing of Church fathers and saints, and a few holy priests that tell us the truth.

        Reply
  11. Cardinal Burke said that the formal act of correction will take place “sometime.” The pressure to rationalize and wait is immense. Cardinal Burke, do it in January 2017.

    Reply
  12. Some might say that Burke, Caffarra, Meisner, Brandmuller (and whoever else might potentially join in a formal correction, hopefully some others will have the guts to add their name) are being foolish to telegraph their punch with this interview. But this is the right thing, because they are not trying to “punch” anyone, least of all the Successor of St. Peter.

    By stating their intention in public, rather than suddenly releasing a correction, they are effectively offering the Pope a last chance to do something to avoid this step, not because they have any authority over him to punish him, but because they are giving him the respect of fair warning.

    They are not allowing themselves to forget at any time that he is the Pope, and that any correction must be done with the utmost respect for the Petrine ministry. To release a correction suddenly, without telegraphing the swing, would come off to the world and to the Catholic laity as an attack (and certainly the Pope’s allies will spin it that way regardless of how it’s done), when in fact the correction is fraternal in the literal sense of the word — i.e., a word of love from brothers to their own brother.

    Reply
    • It could not be sprung on anyone suddenly, it has already been announced for almost two months now that they would issue a formal correction if the Pope did not himself take care of it by answering the dubia in a Catholic manner. Cardinal Burke has spoken on it several times already.

      Reply
      • Yes, I’m aware of his mentioning a formal correction several times before.

        What I mean is that by giving all these additional warnings (“We’re going to do this… We’re actually going to do this, if you don’t respond…”), they are giving him some extra time to rectify the situation, as a kind of due deference. They are not his equals in ecclesial authority.

        I don’t think they have any illusions about the likelihood of a response at this point. They know that the most likely thing is for the Pope to continue his relative silence while allowing the attack dogs to bite. They also know that if/when they go ahead and issue the correction, both the secular media and a large part of the Catholic media will try to black out the news of it (cf. media coverage of the annual US March for Life). To the extent that it must be covered somehow, the army of surrogates, working in conjunction with like-minded journalists, will try paint those issuing the correction as a pathetic little band of “ultra right-wing” fanatics, who have a chip on their shoulder about a more “progressive,” merciful Pope who is more like Jesus than they are.

        You can write their response now: “Well, they are only a tiny handful of bishops in a Church that has thousands of bishops, all of whom are fully in support of the Holy Father except for this harmful little faction, which would be in formal schism except for the fact that the Pope is being merciful to them and generously allowing them to have their ‘say’. They are radical ultra-conservatives stuck in a rigid, self-righteous obsession with rules, while the Pope is trying to help us see, as Christ did, that the rule exists for the person, not the person for the rule. Their ‘correction’ is a sad little gesture, saying much more about their disobedience to the Pope, and therefore to the Holy Spirit, than it does about the Pope’s wonderful Apostolic exhortation. The Holy Spirit led the bishops in the two synods to declare more clearly God’s mercy to the divorced and remarried, and the Pope in his exhortation has not spoken for himself, but for the synod and ultimately for the Holy Spirit.”

        It seems clear to me that they are playing the long game here. Francis will probably never alter Amoris, nor answer the dubia. He may be Pope for another ten years for all anyone knows. But at some point, there will be another conclave, and even though Francis may try to stack the college of cardinals with guys like Cupich, Farrell, Tobin, etc., these four cardinals remain certain that Christ is still the head of the Church, and that even if this situation continues for a long time, he will ultimately help us to get out of it. By issuing a formal correction, they are providing one significant step towards a future pope or council clarifying what Amoris has obscured.

        Reply
        • It has nothing to do with their being equal to him in ecclesial authority: I am well aware of the nature of the hierarchy of the Church. The Pope is not above the Church or her constant Traditions or Teachings.

          In my opinion that is not what they are doing with the formal correction. If Pope Francis does not respond to the formal correction he will be formally accused of heresy and doing grave harm to the unity of the Church. The language that has been used by the Cardinal’s: Rupture, Contrary to the Faith, and the scriptures that they have quoted (they contain the word Anathema.)

          Reply
          • Yes, of course the Pope is not above Tradition or the Deposit of Faith (insofar as this Deposit is nothing other than the witness of the apostles, which is to say nothing other than the teaching of Christ). This is the whole point of the dubia, that no pope has the authority to change doctrine, only to defend it. A pope may explain the same doctrine more clearly if necessary, but he cannot “clarify” it in such a way as to change the content. I’m not entirely sure why you are taking issue with me on this point, as I wasn’t in any way implying that you don’t know the hierarchy of the Church.

            All I’m saying is that the cardinals are going out of their way to show respect to the Petrine office, even though the Pope has not reciprocated — i.e., by showing respect for them as bishops, as successors to the apostles. Instead, he has used his surrogates to launch venomous, personal attacks on them, calling into question their fidelity to Christ and even their mental health (even while utterly failing to respond to the dubia questions). They are taking the high road by not stooping to the same level, by refraining to take the bait and dive into the mud.

            I very much doubt that the formal correction will accuse the Pope of heresy in a personal manner (“The Pope is a heretic”). Seems more likely to me that it will take the form of a statement limited to the document itself, leaving the Pope’s personal orthodoxy as a clear implication rather than a direct accusation.

            I.e., “Claims XY&Z are in conflict with the teaching of Christ, and with the constant, apostolic teaching of the Church. Listed below are 100 examples to show this from Scripture, from councils and popes and fathers and doctors of the Church. Hence, if Amoris does in fact say XY&Z, and if Amoris was intended to say XY&Z, then the text is against Christ and is, by definition, no part of the papal magisterium and not the real teaching of the Petrine ministry, even though it is written by a pope. The infallibility of the Pope, outlined clearly at Vatican I, does not in any way extend to changing fundamental Catholic doctrine.”

          • And I don’t think the Formal Correction will directly accuse Pope Francis of heresy either, however if he does not respond in a Catholic manner to the Formal Correction, i.e. correcting Amoris Laetita then more things will happen after the Formal Correction.

            When I said I don’t think this is what they are doing with the Formal Correction, I was speaking of your view that they are writing for history, they are not principally acting for history: they are acting for the now.

  13. Yesterday, it occurred to me that the only thing i can do is to pray, go to mass, confession and penance and, to trust that God will convert those who oppose his truth or remove them. May God help the Cardinals that have opposed AL and may God use these good Cardinals’ to restore the truth of the one true faith.

    After many years of seeing the truth of the faith being destroyed from within, at least the deceptions are now out in the open and so ultimately God wins again!

    Reply
    • I don’t know any more than anybody else, but my own worthless opinion on the matter is that Pope Bemedict has seen the Third Secret of Fatima, and Bergoglio hasn’t. So Benedict stepped down to let the 3rd Secret reach its fulfilment through Bergoglio. Benedict knew, or at least felt, there was no other way than to let the apostasy ripen at the very top.
      Who knows, for all we know Benedict is obeying something Our Lady spoke of in the Third Secret. But perhaps I am completely wrong. It is all very confusing.

      Reply
        • I don’t know if he did or not. But it would not surprise me if it was kept form him, especially if it had something very bad to say about a bishop in white who was an enemy of the Faith. Just a thought.

          Reply
          • I’ m Argentinian, as the pope… I’m almost sure that if Jorge Mario Bergoglio had access to the third secret, he read it. Of couse is just my guess.

  14. After all of the name calling and unnecessary vitriol that has been slung in the direction of the Four Cardinals and their respective supporters, I was surprisingly comforted by a quote from Euripides which was then used by Leo Tolstoy in his great epic War and Peace “Those whom God wishes to destroy he first makes mad.”

    Reply
  15. And if the Pope does not accept the “corrections” – what then ? Is Card. Burke going to call for the Pope to be formally accused of heresy or schism, or to be deposed, or what ? And what is he going to do when the overwhelming majority of the cardinals stands by the Pope, which is almost certain to be what will happen ?

    Reply
  16. Burke is a cross-dresser. An extravagant, flamboyant cross-dresser with matching gloves and hats . You don’t see it because he is so anti-gay, but he’s a cross dresser.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...