Tuesday, 15 November 2016

Cardinal Burke interviewed on the rebuke of Bergoglio, and yes, it was a rebuke!

My interpretation, for what it is worth, with Cardinal Burke's statement that Amoris Laetitia is not "magisterial," is because of its ambiguities. How can any document from the Church with errors and heresy ever be considered "magisterial." People criticised Cardinal Burke for that statement. 
Image result for burke pope
In an exclusive interview with Catholic Action, Cardinal Burke confirms what this writer always believed: -- "Amoris Laetitia is not Magisterial because it contains serious ambiguities that confuse people and lead them into error and grave sin.'

http://www.catholicaction.org/interview_with_cardinal_burke_about_the_dubia


Cardinal Burke's detractors will state, "who are you to judge the pope."


Let's make no mistake.The pope is not a god. Do not ascribe to any Bishop of Rome that which Protestants have accused us of doing. The First Vatican Council defined narrowly where his "infallibility" lay. The problem is that Catholics, for political purposes, have distorted the Pope's authority. "Full, complete and universal jurisdiction," they will say. No, I say. Not when he teaches error, not when he is heretical! following the release yesterday of the five doubts to which Bergoglio in his arrogance has failed to respond,


The Pope cannot teach error in an infallible manner.That is why Amoris Laetitia is not magisterial, because the Pope IS NOT INFALLIBLE in it. Read that again. Is not infallible!


Who is Cardinal Burke to criticise or challenge the Pope in this regard? Only the greatest legal alive in the Church today and former Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, think here, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. 


The story here is, of course, the letter sent to the Pope. The bigger story is Bergoglio's refusal to answer. 


We are entering a grave crisis in the Church, the gravest since the Protestant revolution. It has been brought about by despicable and deceitful men who hate Christ and hate you and me. They are evil and vile and deserve public outing and flogging.


One of those is Anthony Spadaro, a fellow Jesuit. Barona, at Witness Blog, has this Tweet of Spadaro's and commentary. Spadaro is one of Bergoglio's closest collaborators. He dismisses the four Cardinals as "disqualified."

''


Make no mistake. Our Lord is in control of His Church and He will bring about its purification. It will not come easy and many will fall away.


Do not be one of them.


http://www.catholicaction.org/interview_with_cardinal_burke_about_the_dubia


10 comments:

Michael Dowd said...

Refusal to deny heresy is to admit it. Pope Francis is on the thin edge of automatic excommunication.

Tom Healey said...

Well, it's a good thing Cdl Burke told us it was a "rebuke". How else would we have known!! The 4 cardinals are modernists, albeit, without conscious consent. They want to "dialogue" with Jorge. They want to "walk" with Jorge on his "faith" journey. If this were pointed out to them, they might smile indulgently or be offended. They are truly clueless.

I'm reminded of my own journey since Bergoglio was elected in 2013. I kept insisting that plain speaking, preaching the "hard truths" of Catholicism, doesn't work anymore. Today's generations are not able to accept dogmas. This was my way of defending John Paul ll and Benedict.

Until finally I was given to understand how the heresy of Modernism had infiltrated my own soul. Then my eyes started to open regarding the infiltration of the church and the West, the colossal betrayal of Christ by Vatll, and all the popes following Pope Pius Xll.

Ana Milan said...

The last thing PF is capable of doing is clarifying anything. He is all about ambiguity because that is what suits his NWO Agenda. If he 'clarified' anything he teaches by sitting on the Throne of Peter he would have been declared a heretic long ago. Fr. Spadaro knows this but hopes we don't, LOL. It goes to show the intellect level of PF's advisers when they expect everything he says or writes is to be believed & followed. Infallibility only comes into force when the Pope speaks ex cathedra & at no other time.

Tom Healey said...

It's not "ambiguity" that prevents most of the Trad blogs from calling Jorge the heretic that he is. There is endless talk about ambiguity, and you're right that ambiguity suits his "NWO agenda". However, you don't follow thru., except to go off on tangents. Jorge is extremely cunning, and he knows HUMAN WEAKNESS that comes from original sin, even though he rejects the church's doctrine of o/s. He knows that he can hide his perfidy in "plain sight" and most Catholics, such as most Trad blogs and commenters will endlessly debate his outrages, but will not draw the only honest conclusion that is right in front of our eyes. He is an apostate in the Public Forum. Human weakness, stupidity that are the ugly fruit of Original Sin. It's much easier to go along, to fret, to be outraged, but to never take a stand against this enemy of Christ.

Sybok said...

Vox thank you for all the coverage and effort you put into our religion , I get all my news on the Church mostly from you these days.

Peter Lamb said...

Dear Tom Healey, well said. You are pointing in the right direction. This business about " Infallibility only comes into force when the Pope speaks ex cathedra & at no other time", is absolute tripe! This is actually heresy. It is fondly embraced by Ferrara and many R&Rs, to vainly try to bolster their fanciful ecclesiology of a Catholic being able to recognise a heretic as true Pope and yet resist him. Wrong on both counts - an heretic can't be Pope and a Catholic is bound to the teaching of a true Pope. Tom hit the nail squarely on the head when he said "Today's generations are not able to accept dogmas." Very many Catholics are unaware how much modernism has penetrated their souls. Tom hits the nail again: " It's much easier to go along, to fret, to be outraged, but to never take a stand against this enemy of Christ." Absolutely spot on sir!

The universal and ordinary magisterium is just as infallible as the solemn magisterium. The infallibility of the Church is NOT limited to the solemn magisterium.

Vatican Council I, Dogmatic Constitution on the Faith (1870), DZ 1792: “Further, by divine and Catholic faith, all those things must be believed which are contained in the written word of God and in tradition, and those which are proposed by the Church, either in a solemn pronouncement or in her ORDINARY AND UNIVERSAL magisterium to be believed as divinely revealed.”

From the Infallible/Ex Cathedra Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX number 22:
22. The obligation by which Catholic teachers and authors are strictly bound is confined to those things only which are proposed to universal belief as dogmas of faith by the infallible judgment of the Church. — Letter to the Archbishop of Munich, “Tuas libenter,” Dec. 21, 1863. CONDEMNED

“Nor can we pass over in silence the audacity of those who ... contend that “without sin and without any sacrifice of the Catholic profession assent and obedience may be refused to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See, whose object is declared to concern the Church’s general good and her rights and discipline, so only it does not touch the dogmata of faith and morals.” (Quanta cura, Pope Pius IX.)

"Wherefore, let the faithful also be on their guard against the overrated independence of private judgment and that false autonomy of human reason. For it is quite foreign to everyone bearing the name of a Christian to trust his own mental powers with such pride as to agree only with those things which he can examine from their inner nature, and to imagine that the Church, sent by God to teach and guide all nations, is not conversant with present affairs and circumstances; or even that they must obey only in those matters which she has decreed by solemn definition as though her other decisions might be presumed to be false or putting forward insufficient motive for truth and honesty. Quite to the contrary, a characteristic of all true followers of Christ, lettered or unlettered, is to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff, who is himself guided by Jesus Christ Our Lord."(Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, nn. 103-104)

Peter Lamb said...

"To sum up, Catholics are bound to believe what the Church teaches. To refuse the assent of divine-Catholic faith to a dogma is to be a heretic; to refuse the assent of ecclesiastical faith to a doctrine which the Church teaches as belonging indirectly to the deposit of faith is to be more or less near to heresy; to refuse internal religious assent to the non-infallible doctrinal decisions of the Holy See is to fail in that submission which Catholics are strictly bound to render to the teaching authority of the Church." ("Must I Believe It?" by Canon George Smith Ph.D., D.D.)

Theological notes and their associated censures from the table in Sixtus Cartechini, S.J.'s 1951 work De Valore Notarum Theologicarum:

Theological note: Dogma.
Equivalent terms: Dogma of faith; de fide, de fide Catholica; de fide divina et Catholica.
Explanation: A truth proposed by the Church as revealed by God.
Examples: The Immaculate Conception; all the contents of the Athanasian Creed.
Censure attached to contradictory proposition: Heresy
Effects of denial: Mortal sin committed directly against the virtue of faith, and, if the heresy is outwardly professed, excommunication is automatically incurred and membership of the Church forfeited.
Remarks: A dogma can be proposed either by a solemn definition of pope or council, OR BY THE ORDINARY MAGISTERIUM, as in the case of the Athanasian Creed, to which the church has manifested her solemn commitment by its long-standing liturgical and practical use and commendation.

Peter Lamb said...

Theological Note: Doctrine of ecclesiastical faith
Equivalent term: De fide ecclesiastica definita
Explanation: A truth not directly revealed by God but closely connected with Divine revelation and infallibly proposed by the Magisterium.
Example: The lawfulness of communion under one kind.
Censure attached to contradictory proposition: Heresy against ecclesiastical faith.
Effects of denial: Mortal sin directly against faith, and, if publicly professed, automatic excommunication and forfeiture of membership of Church.
Remarks: It is a dogma that THE CHURCH'S INFALLIBILITY EXTENDS to truths in this sphere, so one who denies them denies implicitly a dogma or Divine faith.

The Catholic Church is Infallible and Indefectible. That is dogma. The Holy Ghost will not allow the Church to teach error harmful to the salvation of souls. The infallibility of the Church is not the alpha and omega demanding obedience. The Pope teaches with the AUTHORITY of Christ Himself and that AUTHORITY demands our obedience. Do you really think bergoglio compares to a true Pope? Does he sound like a Pope? Does he walk like a Pope? Does he look like a Pope? Does he act like a Pope? Does the conciliar church, in any way resemble the Catholic Church?

Ana Milan said...

Tom Healey:
If you are answering my post I have to say I don't understand how you can possibly suggest that Traditional Catholics haven't fingered PF as an Apostate as they have been stating so for the past two years. It took some time for those who elected him to be brought around to our point of view, but now that their representatives (those who support the SSPX & others, possibly fifty) have issued this Dubia I feel they deserve our support. PF can no longer avoid an answer, and whichever way he does so he is in trouble. The CDF is now also implicated & it is their duty & ours to keep tremendous pressure on PF to comply & respond. Papal Exhortations must be perfectly clear for everyone to understand & if they are to be binding then they should be spoken ex cathedra. This public Dubia backs PF into a corner from which there can be no escape. "Qui tacet consentire" applies - no response then the Anathema must follow.

TLM said...

Like Steve Skojec said in his article.......You can be sure that the Cardinals have given him a time limit as to a 'public' answer. After that has passed, they will take the next step, whatever that may be. Not sure if it's a request to meet with him in person or???? There are definitive steps to be taken before they can declare him Anathema.

And....it would have been wonderful if they had been able to convince the remaining Cardinals that were supportive to add their names as well. Plainly fear and cowardice come into play here.