MJM: Now, in a private letter of September 5th to the bishops of Buenos Aires, Pope Francis wrote: “There are no other interpretations of Amoris Laetitia,” other than one admitting divorced and remarried Catholics to Holy Communion in some cases. He is so adamant about this, Your Eminence. So, is it even possible for you to envision a scenario whereby you suddenly discover that you've missed something, that the Four Cardinals are misinterpreting it, and that you'd have to concede you were wrong? I mean if that’s not possible, then what is the point of the dubia? Don’t you already know the answers to your five questions?
Cardinal Burke: Certainly we do. But the important thing is that the pastor of the universal Church, in his office as guardian of the truths of the Faith and promoter of the truths of the faith—that he make clear that, yes, he answers these questions in the same way that the Church answers them. And so what he wrote in that letter simply means that this is his personal understanding of the matter. But that letter hardly could be considered an exercise of the papal magisterium. And so, it's a painful situation in which to be involved but we simply have to press forward to clarify the matter.
Full text can be found at:
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2980-the-remnant-interview-of-cardinal-raymond-burke
18 comments:
I was with him until he referred to JPII as "saint".
God bless this holy man for his desire for truth and clarity. In this world, permeated by much confusion, sin, moral relativism, and a most revolting disregard for the sanctity of Our Lord's teachings, we need more men like Cardinal Burke today. We have had nearly four years of confusing and contradictory statements come forth from the mouth of Pope Francis. We need a "ROCK" to cling to for stability as Catholics. We must remember to pray fervently for all clergy and religious. If Pope Francis does not concede to the Cardinals' dubia, I pray he faces accountability before the entire Church. When will Pope Francis realize he is not in a popularity contest. He is to lead his flock. We have had too many years of flushing our beliefs and customs down the drain just to appease others. --Mother of God, please intercede for us. Hear our prayers. May God give our priests and religious the courage and zeal to battle for our faith. Please watch over us. Amen
It's gratifying to note that the four Cardinals are intent on receiving the clarity they have asked for in the Dubia. Such a pity that Cardinal Müller has buckled under the pressure of three of his most trusted priests being recently sacked by PF & probably his own position being re-named & transformed into another department within the Vatican, most likely headed-up by Cardinal Schönborn.
The tyrannical goings-on in the Vatican under PF must be stopped. It is illogical & has nothing to do with fostering the True Faith but everything to do with the NWO intent on destroying it. We must continue in our prayers for an end to this political take-over of the CC & return it to its foundational purpose 'to teach all nations what I have taught you' thereby ensuring that the Word of Christ is not only heard but adhered to by all God's people.
Thank you. Just a personal question, Cardinal Burke's breathing always sounds labored. Is he physically well or does he suffer from asthma or some respiratory illness?
Ana......I'm not totally convinced that Cdl. Muller's words were not 'twisted' to look like he was on the side of the 'Francis Church' with all it's heresies and mafia like tactics. You have to remember that these 'hard left' Vatican officials operate in the same way as the secular left......THEY LIE.
Catholic Reality Check:
If bergoglio is Pope, thou shalt obey his teaching!
To the shepherds alone was given all power to teach, to judge, to direct; on the faithful was imposed the duty of following their teach-ing, of submitting with docility to their judgment, and of allowing themselves to be governed, corrected, and guided by them in the way of salvation. Thus, it is an absolute necessity for the simple faithful to submit in mind and heart to their own pastors, and for the latter to submit with them to the Head and Supreme Pastor.
(Pope Leo XIII, Letter Epistola Tua to Cardinal Guibert, June 17, 1885; excerpted in Papal Teachings: The Church, p. 263. )
Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.
(Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302.)
Union with the Roman See of Peter is ... always the public criterion of a Catholic.... “You are not to be looked upon as holding the true Catholic faith if you do not teach that the faith of Rome is to be held.”
(Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Satis Cognitum, par. 13.)
Wherefore it belongs to the Pope to judge authoritatively what things the sacred oracles contain, as well as what doctrines are in harmony, and what in disagreement, with them; and also, for the same reason, to show forth what things are to be accepted as right, and what to be rejected as worthless; what it is necessary to do and what to avoid doing, in order to attain eternal salvation. For,otherwise, there would be no sure interpreter of the commands of God, nor would there be any safe guide showing man the way he should live.
(Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Sapientiae Christianae, n. 24)
Indeed one simple way to keep men professing Catholic truth is to maintain their communion with and obedience to the Roman Pontiff. For it is impossible for a man ever to reject any portion of the Catholic faith without abandoning the authority of the Roman Church. In this authority, the unalterable teaching office of this faith lives on. It was set up by the divine Redeemer and, consequently, the tradition from the Apostles has always been preserved. So it has been a common characteristic both of the ancient heretics and of the more recent Protestants — whose disunity in all their other tenets is so great -- to attack the authority of the Apostolic See. But never at any time were they able by any artifice or exertion to make this See tolerate even a single one of their errors.
(Pope Pius IX, Encyclical Nostis et Nobiscum, nn. 16-17.
AMEN.
Peter,
You need to understand that the Pope is NOT infallible in everything. The Pope is infallible ONLY under the exact conditions laid down by Vatican I (1869-70):
For the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter
not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine,
but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.
Indeed, their apostolic teaching was
embraced by all the venerable fathers and
reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors,
for they knew very well that this see of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Saviour to the prince of his disciples: I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren [60] .
This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this see so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell.
But since in this very age when the salutary effectiveness of the apostolic office is most especially needed, not a few are to be found who disparage its authority, we judge it absolutely necessary to affirm solemnly the prerogative which the only-begotten Son of God was pleased to attach to the supreme pastoral office.
Therefore,
faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the christian faith,
to the glory of God our saviour,
for the exaltation of the catholic religion and
for the salvation of the christian people,
with the approval of the sacred council,
we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that
when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA,
that is, when,
in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians,
in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority,
he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church,
he possesses,
by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter,
that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals.
Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable.
So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum20.htm#Chapter 4. On the infallible teaching authority of the Roman pontiff
AL was not, is NOT, and never will be infallible teaching.
Let me ask you one thing: Do you prso for PF? Yes or No.
Margaret
Dear Margaret, You make my point exactly. Indeed the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles. Has bergoglio proposed new doctrine? Is he guarding and faithfully expounding the deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles?
The see of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord. This is Catholic, infallible truth. Is the see of bergoglio unblemished by any error?
This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this see so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell. Holy, infallible truth again. Does bergoglio keep the flock of Christ from the poisonous food of error? Does he nourish us with heavenly doctrine? Does he preserve us in unity? Does he stand firm against the gates of hell (heresy), or is he himself a public heretic?
Are we not in the very age when the salutary effectiveness of the apostolic office is most especially needed? Do the "Recognize and Resisters" not disparage its authority? Do they not say that the Pope is infallible ONLY in the solemn magisterium and deny the infallibility of the ordinary universal magisterium, which is heresy? The Council judged it absolutely necessary to affirm solemnly the prerogative which the only-begotten Son of God was pleased to attach to the supreme pastoral office! Would you dare to sift the prerogative of this supreme office of whom you declare to be a true, formal Pope and gainsay the Council and all the other magisterial quotes I posted? If you do, you are a schismatic. I do so, but I do not recognise bergoglio as Pope. I recognise bergoglio as an imposter; a heretic - an anti-pope.
Pope Gregory XVI declared: “Is it possible that the Church, which is the pillar and ground of truth and which is continually receiving from the Holy Spirit the teaching of all truth, could ordain, grant, permit what would turn to the detriment of the soul’s salvation, to the contempt and harm of a sacrament instituted by Christ?”
1 Matt. XVI: 18 2 I Tim. III: 15 3 Matth. XXVIII: 20 4 John XIV: 16 5 Denz. 1824.
You have established my point exactly! bergoglio does none of the above, so how can he be a true, formal Pope and how can the NWO church be the Catholic Church?
The Catholic Church is infallible and indefectible - it cannot teach error, or anything detrimental to the salvation of souls. Can that be said of bergoglio and his masonic church?
I have to go now, so I will answer your assertion that ONLY the solemn magisterium is infallible later. :)
Dear Margaret, Having established my point that if you recognize bergoglio as a true, formal Pope, thou shalt obey and submit to him, in terms of all the magisterial teaching submitted by both of us, let's move on to the question of Papal infallibility.
You have provided the definition of the infallibility of the solemn magisterium. Please nota very bene that this definition does NOT say that ONLY the solemn magisterium is infallible. This latter myth is promoted by the likes of Farrara and is a complete misunderstanding. The solemn magisterium is only invoked every century, or so, to define dogma. The ordinary magisterium is equally infallible. The same Council decreed: “all those things are to be believed with divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the Word of God, written or handed down, and which the Church, either by a solemn judgment OR BY HER ORDINARY and universal teaching magisterium, proposes for belief as having been divinely revealed”. (Vatican Council I, Denzinger 1792.)
The “unanimous teaching of the Fathers” is likewise proof that a doctrine is part of the universal ordinary magisterium (Salaverri 1:814 ff).
What you are saying is that the pope can teach heresy, and as long as he does not attempt an infallible definition, all is well. It is not so. That the Church is infallible means this:
"...the Church can neither deceive or be deceived in matters of faith and morals. It is a prerogative of the whole Church; but it belongs in one way to those who fulfill the office the office of teaching, and another way to those who are taught. Hence, the distinction between active infallibility, by which the Church's rulers are rendered immune from error when they teach; and passive infallibility, by which all of Christ's faithful are preserved from error in their beliefs." (See theologian Van Noort, Dogmatic Theology, 2: 102).
In his Infallible/Ex Cathedra Syllabus of Errors, Pope Pius IX specifically denounces the myth you are proposing:
22. [Those who say that] "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. — CONDEMNED."
(Letter to the Archbishop of Munich, “Tuas libenter,” Dec. 21, 1863.)
Again the same Pope says in Quanta Cura:
“Nor can we pass over in silence the audacity of those who, not enduring sound doctrine, 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.” But no one can be found not clearly and distinctly to see and understand how grievously this is opposed to the Catholic dogma of the full power given from God by Christ our Lord Himself to the Roman Pontiff of feeding, ruling and guiding the Universal Church.”
"The Church's infallibility extends to the general discipline of the Church. ...But if the Church could make a mistake in the manner alleged when it legislated for the general discipline, it would no longer be either a loyal guardian of revealed doctrine or a trustworthy teacher of the Christian way of life." (G. Van Noordt, Dogmatic Theology 2:114-115.)
Catholics must also adhere to: 1. Teachings of the Universal Ordinary Magisterium.
2. Doctrinal Decrees of the Holy See. These include doctrinal statements published by the Holy Office with the pope’s approval, as well as papal encyclicals. Catholics must give all authentically approved papal doctrinal decrees “internal mental and religious assent,” given “out of reverence due to God, who governs through the sacred hierarchical authority of the Church.” (. J. Salaverri, Sacra Theologiae Summa: De Ecclesia (Madrid: BAC 1958) 1:659, 666.)
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. (Canon George Smith.)
According to the theologians the Pope is “one hierarchical person with our Lord.” This being so, when he speaks within his function, it is our Lord who speaks – teaches, governs and sanctifies.
Pius IX, Mortalium Animos, 6 Jan 1928: No one is in Christ’s Church or remains there unless he acknowledges and obeys the Pope.
Another myth is that Vatican I "limited" the power of the Pope. No Council; no man on Earth can "limit" the power of the Pope! Peter and his successors received their authority from Jesus Christ, God, Himself and only He can limit it, or take it away. The Pope is judged by NO man.( Of course, if he is an heretic, he is no longer Pope and then he can be judged as an ordinary man.)
By the way, writing in the Vatican newspaper, a Spanish ecclesiology professor said that Pope Francis’s apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia is part of the non-definitive ordinary Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff to which the faithful owe religious submission of intellect and will.
Father Salvador Pie-Ninot examined the exhortation in light of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s 1990 instruction on the ecclesial vocation of the theologian, as well as the Second Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. ( https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=29164).
Jorge says AL is magisterial. The Roman Pontiff daily exercises teaching authority to which the Catholic must allow himself to be ruled and directed. As such, if Bergoglio is Pope, the discussions about his encyclical should be about how to apply his teachings faithfully.
Dear Margaret, "Let me ask you one thing: Do you prso for PF? Yes or No." Sorry, I don't know what "prso" means. :)
Peter,
I meant to ask: Do you pray for PF? Yes or No
Margaret
Peter,
Please don't insult Chris Ferrara.
Margaret
Peter,
I also know about the different degrees of religious assent. I have to go now.
Meanwhile, this is for you:
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/2981-pope-francis-refuses-to-answer-the-dubia-what-happens-next
Margaret
As taken from:
IUCUNDA SANE
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS X
ON POPE GREGORY THE GREAT
TO OUR VENERABLE BRETHREN, THE PATRIARCHS,
PRIMATES, ARCHBISHOPS, BISHOPS,
AND OTHER ORDINARIES
IN PEACE AND COMMUNION WITH THE APOSTOLIC:
" 20. Yet there is no salvation for the world but in Christ: "For there is no other name under heaven given to men whereby we may be saved" (Acts iv. 12). To Christ then we must return. At His feet we must prostrate ourselves to hear from His divine mouth the words of eternal life, for He alone can show us the way of regeneration, He alone teach us the truth, He alone restore life to us. It is He who has said: "I am the way, the truth, and the life" (John xiv. 16). Men have once more attempted to work here below without Him, they have begun to build up the edifice after rejecting the corner stone, as the Apostle Peter rebuked the executioners of Jesus for doing. And lo! the pile that has been raised again crumbles and falls upon the heads of the builders, crushing them. But Jesus remains for ever the corner stone of human society, and again the truth becomes apparent that without Him there is no salvation: "This is the stone which has been rejected by you, the builders, and which has become the head of the corner, neither is there salvation in any other" (Acts iv. 11, 12). "
May God Bless this great Cardinal Burke and all other cardinals that support him in this desperate struggle. May God Bless Ana Milan and all others who fight for what is right, holy and true.
George Brenner
Dear Margaret, Sorry I upset you. Surely we can discuss Catholic doctrine in a friendly unemotional way? It's not my opinion against your opinion, it's about doctrine which is objective, accessible and determined. Now don't say you don't want it, but here is just a little one to make friends again. x :)
Ahem....?
Post a Comment