“A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, 'You are mad; you are not like us.” ― St. Antony the Great
“In fact, the consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart
of Mary did not take place, as she requested.”
“I now return to the third part of the Secret or Message of
Fatima. Without entering into a discussion regarding whether the third part of
the Secret has been fully revealed, it seems clear from the most respected
studies of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima, that it has to do with the
diabolical forces unleashed upon the world in our time and entering into the very
life of the Church which lead souls away from the truth of the faith and,
therefore, from the Divine Love flowing from the glorious pierced Heart of
Jesus.”
V. Let us pray for Raymond Cardinal BurkeR. May he stand firm and care for us in the
strength of the Lord, in the might of thy name, O Lord.
Dubia: What was the main reason you the four
cardinals made the dubia public?
Because there is so much confusion in the
Church about fundamental questions which are defined with regard to intrinsic
moral evil, with regard to Holy Communion and the right disposition to receive
Holy Communion and regarding the indissolubility of marriage.
There is so much confusion that we, first of
all, asked the Holy Father to clarify please these questions, these fundamental
questions. We limited our request to those four questions in the dubia. When
there was no response, because so many people were saying to us: “But why do
you cardinals not do you duty and teach clearly about this matters?”, we knew
that we had to let the people know about the dubia. Yes, we are trying our
best, we are trying to receive from the Holy Father the direction which the
Church needs right now. Because there is a very dangerous confusion and also,
with the confusion, come divisions.
Priests against priests, and disagreements
among fellow catholics about whether you are able to receive the Sacraments, if
you live in an unvalid marriage union. We even find disagreements among the
Bishops, and this should not be…This is not for the good of the Church.
Why only four cardinals signed the dubia?
I can tell you there are more than four
cardinals who support the dubia, but for various reasons they do not want to
say so publicly. The four cardinals who signed the dubia, simply knew that it
was our duty, not thinking that we needed to have a certain number of cardinals
with us. We four knew we had to do this, and so we did it.
So you have private support from other
cardinals?
Yes.
What would you say to those who said that you
were challenging the Pope?
There is no challenge whatsoever to the Pope.
In fact, the practice of bringing dubia or questions to the Pope is a very
ancient practice in the Church, and the document showed respect for the Pope
who is leading the Church in a critical moment or in a time of confusion or in
a time even of error. So if you read the dubia, we are very respectful. We
don’t accuse the Holy Father of anything. We simply ask him for the benefit of
the Church to make these matters clear.
You spoke about some precedents of formal
correction to the Pope in the history of the Church…
I think, for example, of Pope John XXII who was
teaching wrongly about the Beatific Vision.
Certain bishops and theologians pointed this out to him. At first he
resisted their correction, but then, before he died, he did retract what he had
said that was in error.
There are other cases that are similar in the
history of the Church. Some are about major practical matters, even the
administration of temporal goods. For example, the Cardinals have gone to the
Holy Father and said to him, “in our judgement you are not administering well
the goods of the Church”, and then the Pope corrected himself.
Do you think there will be a formal public
correction to Pope Francis?
That it is not clear yet. Normally speaking,
before taking that step, the Cardinals would approach once again the Holy
Father personally to say: Holy Father, the matter is so grave that we must
correct it, and I trust that the Holy Father will respond at that moment.
But you don’t think that the Cardinal Müller’s
interview in Il Timone was an answer to Dubia?
I believe so. It certainly pertains very much
to the whole discussion, and it makes very clear what the Church is teaching
regarding such matters. I believe, but I do not know, since I have not talked
to Cardinal Müller, that the interview, is a pastoral effort, on his part, to
present the Church’s teaching clearly.
But the Pope hasn’t answered yet…
To my knowledge, not to me and I don’t think to
the others three cardinals. I don’t think he has given any answer.
What about the date of the formal correction?
I really cannot speak about that because it is
a matter which has to be approached with great respect and delicacy. And I do
not want to suggest a date that would in any way affect negatively the handling
of the matter or would show disrespect to anyone involved.
In the previous moments and after you published
the dubia, have you kept in contact wih the Emeritus Pope?
No, I have never spoken with him about the
dubia.
…
– Valileaks: The leaks spoke of 1.000 flats of
the Holy See throughout Rome. Do you believe that being the Church the biggest
landowner of the caput mundi takes away the credibility of its evangelical
message?
First of all, I don’t know the truth about
that. What I would say is this: I don’t think that, if Church owns the land, it
takes away credibility, but the way the land is administered will affect very
much the credibility of Church. In fact, having all these properties, the
Church could use them for many good purposes, but the administration has to be
strictly according to Church law. I am not saying it is not, but for my part,
the only scandal would be if that in some way these properties are not being
correctly managed.
Vatican diplomacy has changed so much in the
last years. How do you value that the Holy See treated as a “consort” the
homosexual lover of the President of Luxemburg?
I think something has to be done to address the
public image that is given by such acts. In the past, the Holy See simply, in a
very discreet and respectful way, refused to permit such a thing. We have to
return to that because by openly permitting this, the very strong impression is
given that now the Holy See approves such situations. So that has to be made
clear. I think too the terms for choosing those who are invited officially to
come and to speak to the conferences at the Holy See have to be clear. I don’t
understand how people who have openly opposed the Church and her teachings can
be invited to this kind of conference.
Like Paul Ehrlich…
Exactly, Paul Ehrlich…A prime example.
Yes but the one that was responsible for that
invitation was Cardinal Ravasi who wrote “Cari fratelli masoni” in Il Sole 24…
Yes, I haven’t read that book yet (Alberto
Bárcena: Masonería, religión y política) but whoever is responsible, is also
responsible to give an answer for that.
The letter of Cardinal Ravasi?
I haven’t read that letter. I didn’t read it,
but I heard about it.
Islam: Cardinal Sarah warned of two threats,
Islam and gender: Do you believe that Islam is suitable with the coexistence in
the Western World?
I share Cardinal Sarah’s concern. These are the
two great threats of the present time. I am also very strong in my conviction
that one of the prime ways to address them is through education. We have to
make sure that in our schools and our universities the truth is been taught.
Both about human nature itself and the whole
question of gender which is a completely artificial creation of a certain
ideology. And also that the truth be taught about Islam. The nature of Islam is
a form of goverment. By its own beliefs or principles it intends to govern the
world. And also about Allah. The figure of Allah in the Coran and in other
Islamic writings is completely different from the God of the Judaeo-Christian
faith.
What reasons for hope does a Catholic family
have in today’s world, marked by a culture of death and where gender ideology
is considered as the only truth about the human being?
Of course, there is reason for hope because
Christ is always giving his grace to individuals and to families. And this
whole situation can be transformed through individuals and families. I travel a
great deal now to various parts of the world. In America and everywhere I go I
find good young people and good young families and other families who maybe are
not young but are very committed Catholic families. This gives me hope, because
the more that we can encourage one another to be faithful in Jesus Christ, then
the world can be transformed.
What advice would you give to these Catholic
families who want their children to grow in freedom?
My advice would be to make prayer, especially
the Holy Eucarist and regular confession, the center of family life, to pay
very careful attention to educate their children clearly in the teachings of
the Church and in the moral law, and thirdly to work together with other
families to encourage one another and to become a great force for good in the
world.
The Pope made a statement that from now on, the
weddings celebrated by the priests from the FSSPX are going to be recognised
I did not read that yet. That is a very
significant action of the Holy Father, and it also indicates that in someway
there must be a reconciliation of the FSSPX because basically what the Pope is
saying is that the priests in this society, when they witness marriages, are
exercising jurisdiction in the Roman Catholic Church. So that is very
interesting.
Do you think the personal prelature is a good
way for the reconciliation?
I believe it could be a very effective way for
the reconciliation.
Would it be great news?
Yes. I pray for it, and I hope that it will
come about. But the reconciliation of course has to be based on a common
understanding. We cannot just simply will it. In other words, if there is not a
common understanding, what we reconcile will result in all sort of conflicts
and difficulties. We have to make sure that there it is a common understanding
in regard to all the questions which, in the past, the FSPPX has had about the
Church, the Holy See and the direction of the Catholic Church.
1. Consistent reports are coming that the four Cardinals have met with and issued their correction to the Bishop of Rome. If he does not respond, they will go public.
2. It is also rumored that Cardinal Muller has resigned from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. On the Mass, it looks as if my recent theory is now also rumoured in Rome. More soon.
A disgusting anti-Catholic and Marxist screed. I highly doubt that this arrogant, so-called, journalist, would write such a critical piece on Islam. What is happening here is a realization that Francis is in jeopardy, a jeopardy of his own making. There is going to be a massive schism and it will be caused by Francis. This article is a plant and part of a wider plan to defend Bergoglio from the outcry of faithful Catholics. This woman is using Alinsky tactics to target and assassinate Cardinal Burke, if she could do so literally, I have no doubt that she would. The evil that flows from the keyboard of this Symons and the recent piece in the New York Times is so obvious to see. They will all come crashing down and will fall like snowflakes in to Hell. May Our Blessed LORD continue to guide Cardinal Burke and may St. Michael protect him from these enemies. Amen.
Emma-Kate
Symons is a Washington-based journalist and former Paris correspondent. Her
work has been published in Foreign Policy, Women in the World in association
with the New York Times, Quartz, the Atlantic, the Wall Street Journal and the
Australian Financial Review.
Pope
Francis needs to take tougher action against the United States’ most
influential Catholic in Rome, Cardinal Raymond “Breitbart” Burke. The renegade
cleric is not only undermining Francis’s reformist, compassionate papacy, and
gospel teaching as it applies to refugees and Muslims, but the rebel prince of
the church is also using his position within the walls of the Vatican to
legitimize extremist forces that want to bring down Western liberal democracy,
Stephen K. Bannon-style. Simply put, the Vatican is facing a political war
between the modernizing Pope Francis and a conservative wing that wants to
reassert white Christian dominance.
Burke was
reduced to a ceremonial patron role at the Knights of Malta after a power
struggle at the ancient chivalric order, won by the pope last month, following
a spat over its humanitarian wing’s alleged distribution of condoms. Losing the
leadership battle and prestige at the secretive society headquartered in Rome —
Francis is appointing his own special delegate above Burke — was seen as a
papal rap on the knuckles for the cardinal leading the charge against Francis’s
writings on communion for divorcees. But
the virulently anti-Islam (“capitulating to Islam would be the death of
Christianity”), migrant-phobic, Donald
Trump-defending, Vladimir Putin-excusing Burke is unrepentant and even defiant,
continuing to preside over a far-right, neo-fascist-normalizing cheer squad out
of the Holy See.
This
Vatican operation, called Dignitatis Humanae, or the Institute for Human
Dignity, whose advisory board includes two of the four cardinals openly
challenging Francis on marriage and sexuality, is slavishly promoting Burke’s
favorite American white Catholic nationalist, Bannon, with star billing on its
home page. The institute’s top office-bearers, Burke and his henchman, the
media-savvy Breitbart contributor Benjamin Harnwell, are also encouraging
Benito Mussolini fan Matteo Salvini, of Italy’s Northern League, and
Muslim-baiting far-right Catholic poster girl Marion Le Pen, the National Front
“rising star” niece of party leader Marine Le Pen in France.
As the Italian press first revealed, Burke
held a long meeting last week at his Vatican home with Salvini, a fierce critic
of the pope who wants to push refugees back into the sea and close all mosques
in Italy. It was a flagrant political intervention on the side of the
extreme-right racist grouping ahead of the Italian elections. Mysterious
posters also appeared around the Vatican decrying a sinister-looking pope’s
“decapitation” of the Malta Knights order.
The
situation facing the Catholic Church raises alarming parallels with the
ideological warfare that split the Vatican in the 1930s when ethnic nationalism
was sweeping Europe under Mussolini and Hitler and when fascist forces
infiltrated the highest echelons of the church. In 1937, Pope Pius XI published
an encyclical in German denouncing the Nazi regime and its racism. The diatribe
infuriated Hitler, but the focus was more on Nazi persecution of Catholics than
laws targeting Jews.
In Italy, the Vatican had long made
accommodations with Mussolini for its own geopolitical gains, and Pius XI
failed to quell widespread institutional anti-Semitism in the church before it
was too late. When Mussolini decreed in 1938 that Italian Jews were to suffer a
legal fate similar to those in Germany, Pius XI tried to prepare a fresh
encyclical deploring anti-Semitism and racism, as revealed in historian David
Kertzer’s book “The Pope and Mussolini,” he was double-crossed by pro-fascist
forces in the Vatican working in tandem with Il Duce. Senior figures in the
French Catholic Church also collaborated with fascism in France, where the
Vichy regime aided the Nazis in deporting about 80,000 Jews to the death camps.
The lesson of history has not been lost on
Francis. After President Trump’s inauguration, he warned that rising populism
could produce a new Hitler. But now, as Europe faces historic elections that
could bring extreme-right nationalists back into power across the continent for
the first time since World War II, he must act. The bellicose anti-Islam
invective being marshaled by figures such as Burke shares much in common with
the vicious anti-Semitism many Catholic clerics adhered to in the 1930s, when
they saw Jews as a danger to the Christian West whose rights must be
restricted.
Burke, like
Bannon, who says Islam is “the most radical” religion in the world, makes no
distinction in his clash-of-civilizations frenzy between the Muslim faith’s
diverse currents and interpretations, and violent jihadist movements derived
mostly from Saudi-style Salafism. Unsurprisingly, Burke says he is “very
satisfied” with Russian autocrat Putin’s “defense of life and family” and
believes he may have “converted” since his KGB days. Yet, just as godless
Communism posed an existential threat in the past, the Catholic Church has
nothing to gain and everything to lose from cozying up to far-right extremists
from the United States to Europe. They distort Christianity into an
exclusionary ideology in defense of nation and race, and unite a new support
base of Muslim-haters with historically anti-Semitic movements such as the
National Front that are anything but Christian, and often neo-pagan.
The options
open to the pope in dealing with Burke are limited. Excommunication isn’t in
the cards; Burke is not a heretic denying the Catholic faith. Nor is Burke
refusing to submit to the pontiff like French archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who
was cast out by John Paul II after his ultra-conservative Society of Saint Pius
X ordained its own bishops rather than take directions from the Vatican.
However,
Francis, who has full authority over his cardinals, could fully remove Burke
from his remaining sinecure with Knights of Malta, call him in for a pastoral
correction on the issue of his unacceptable political interventions,
investigate Dignitatis Humanae with a view to shutting it down for its
subversive politicking, and send the rebel cardinal back home to the United
States. As Burke tries to run an insurgency and rebukes the pope for his
doctrinal “ambiguities,” with the backing of thousands of priests, Francis
could seize the agenda. In time-honored papal tradition, he could write an
encyclical on the burning questions of populism and nationalism, with specific
reference to migrants, Muslims and Jews, so priests including Burke know they
are in breach of church teaching when they try to act as power brokers for the
international extreme right.
The stakes
could hardly be higher, especially as the pope seems on a collision course with
a Trump-Bannon White House that has imposed a form of a Muslim ban and
disparaged him during the election campaign for daring to suggest that building
a wall on the United States’ southern border was un-Christian. If the pope
doesn’t put the reactionary elements such as Burke and his cronies back in
their place, they could force a real schism during his papacy and leave the
church open to justifiable accusations it failed to stand up to enablers of
extremism and neo-fascism within its ranks.
The condom distributing Boeselager of the Knights of Malta has blamed Cardinal Raymond Burke for the Order's crisis.
He went so far as to disclose a threat: “I think we cannot foresee and we will not make comments on
what will happen to Cardinal Burke in the future. That remains the decision of
the Holy Father,” Feel free to make Cardinal Burke a white martyr of the faith, but before you do Jorge, consider this. On February 1, Milo Yiannopolis was scheduled to speak to a few hundred. Violent fascist protesters in Berkeley gave him an audience of tens of millions. This blog had a few hundred thousand readers after ten years until Tom Rosica, that brilliant media-savvy clericalist came along. Now, it has a growing international audience. These occurrences are known as the Streisand Effect. Go ahead, it will be the real Francis Effect. Take away his red hat. You'll only make him a greater saint. As for the Knights of Malta, I feel great sorrow for two of my friends who are Knights, here in Toronto.
Laudetur Jesus Christus! Now that the once great Knights of Malta have folded like a bunch of effeminate bridge players can we now just admit what and who the real target of this sordid mess happens to be?
The Lord bless thee, and keep thee.
The Lord shew his face
to thee, and have mercy on thee.
The Lord turn his countenance to thee, and
give thee peace. Numbers 6:24-26
And it is this last element that is the most newsworthy in
the statement released this evening by the Order. As Settimo Cielo had
correctly reported, Pope Francis has in effect granted the Order the faculty of
proceeding according to its constitutions concerning its interim regency - now
assumed by the Grand Commander of the Order, Fra' Ludwig Hoffmann von
Rumerstein - and the appointment of the new Grand Master. So the “pontifical
delegate” will neither replace nor overlap the legitimate governance of the Order,
as many had hoped or feared. Instead he will accompany it with the task of
“spiritual” guide. A task, that is, very similar to the one that already
belongs by statute to the cardinal patron.
The decapitation inflicted by Pope Francis on the Order of
Malta is therefore twofold. Because what is falling is not only the head of
Grand Master Festing, but also, de facto, that of cardinal patron Raymond Leo
Burke. Meaning the ones who had brought about the removal of Boeselager in the
certainty that they were thereby putting into practice the mandate entrusted to
them by the pope, in a December 1 letter to Burke: to “promote the spiritual
interests of the order and remove any affiliation with groups or practices that
run contrary to the moral law.”
Go ahead Bishop of Rome Bergoglio, you'll make him a white martyr and set yourself against the work of faith for all to see. But you and your leftist, globalist cabal of malefactors, sodomites and Marxists will paint this man to be the real problem. You will have set yourself against Christ, just like those who put Him on the cross. Your end will come, it will come soon. it will be devastating and it will be complete. Repent, all you who have sullied Holy Mother Church. Repent or be damned in His judgement.
“Because everywhere I go — and I travel a lot
now — everywhere I go people are saying: 'What's wrong with you Cardinals?
There are these serious questions, and yet you remain silent. You don't say
anything.'"
“And they’re correct,” he continued. “If we
were to remain silent, it would most definitely give the idea to the faithful
that everything is fine. But everything is not fine.”
In a carefully worded and very precise series of statements to Catholic World Report, Raymond Cardinal Burke has outlined, hypothetically, what would happen should a pope teach heresy.
He refers to the last time such a situation occurred was under John XXII in the thirteenth century and backs up with scripture, the right of a bishop or cardinal to correct a pope, citing Paul's rebuke of Peter in Galatians.
CWR: Bishop Athanasius Schneider, O.R.C., the Auxiliary
Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan and titular
bishop of Celerina, who has written an open letter of support for the four
cardinals and their dubia, has also said that the Church is in a de facto
schism. Do you agree with that? Cardinal Burke: There is a very serious division in the
Church which has to be mended because it has to do with, as I said before,
fundamental dogmatic and moral teaching. And if it’s not clarified soon, it
could develop into a formal schism. CWR: Some people are saying that the pope could separate
himself from communion with the Church. Can the pope legitimately be declared
in schism or heresy? Cardinal Burke: If a Pope would formally profess heresy he
would cease, by that act, to be the Pope. It’s automatic. And so, that could
happen. CWR: That could happen. Cardinal Burke: Yes.
One could expect a new barrage of assaults from the minions surrounding Pope Francis. Let us keep Cardinal Burke and all faithful prelates in our prayers.
Our readers will be most interested in this exclusive interview by Lisa Bourne at LifeSiteNews with Raymond Cardinal Burke on the next steps relating to the four Cardinals dubia to the Pope on the errors in Amoris Laetitia. LifeSiteNews was once dismissed by Vatican advisor Thomas J. Rosica, CSB, and Executive Producer of the little watched Salt + Light Television, as being, "run out of somebody's basement in the Ottawa valley," and in being "non-Catholic." Some basement!
One might consider supporting their Christmas fundraising campaign to remind Father Rosica, and their other detractors, exactly how important they are today.
“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.”
Perhaps some of our readers saw this picture last evening surface on Twitter. It is of Cardinal Raymond Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider speaking before a packed room in Rome's Centro Lepanto.
You can bet that it was all over Rome, that which was discussed, before those thugs, minions and hangers at the Vatican settled down for a rub down at one of Rome's more particular establishments with their gaystapo boytoys.because they sure weren't praying their Office or doing a Holy Hour! Why, you ask? Because if they did these things, they would not do what they do. Courtesy of LifeSiteNews, here are the key quotes:
“When Christ preached 2,000 years ago, the culture and
reigning spirit were radically opposed to Him. Concretely religious syncretism
ruled, also Gnosticism among the intelligent leaders, as well as permissibilism
among the masses — especially regarding the institution of matrimony. […] The
sole purpose of the Son of God was to reveal the truth to the world.”
“The formulation of dubia, as the Cardinals here have
expressed in their own terms, has been a common practice in the Church,” he
explained. “We need to be able to ask questions openly without being afraid of
repressions.”
“The reaction to the dubia is a proof of the climate in
which we actually live in the Church right now,” Bishop Schneider said. “We
live in a climate of threats and of denial of dialogue towards a specific
group.”
“dialogue seems to be accepted only if you think like
everyone else - that is practically like a regime.”
+Schneider brought up his experience in Russia, where he was
born in the time of the Soviet Union. His parents were sent by Stalin to work
camps, or “Gulags,” after the Second World War. “If you didn’t follow the line
of the party, or you questioned it, you couldn’t even ask. That is for me a
very clear parallel to what is happening now in the reactions to the dubia —
questions — of the Cardinals.”
“This is a very sad experience especially since everybody is
speaking about a ‘dialogue of culture’ after the Second Vatican Council. While
bishops openly teach heresies and nothing happens to them, that is truly a
grave injustice and very sad,” Bishop Schneider added.
Cardinal Burke is quoted:
Cardinal Burke has said a “formal correction”
might be in order to resolve the situation of uncertainty. “In the language of
moral theology, fraternal correction is an act of love — if it is given in
obedience and with reason,” Schneider commented. “We have to return to this
familiar way of dealing with it.”
As I wrote yesterday, they are "mad" in the sense of angry and deranged that we will not stop exposing the lies and manipulations that began at the first Synod, continued into the second and continue today. The deal breaker for these Cardinals, in my view. was when Bergoglio confirmed the heretical statement by the Bishops of Buenos Aires compounded by those of the Vicar of Rome. Bergoglio cannot hide from this. He must answer the dubia which will either nullify his attempts to change Divine Law on Holy Communion or expose himself as a heretic. That's it friends, there's just no other way around it. Make a mess, indeed.
Some of those close to Pope Bergoglio have defended him against the dubia of the four Cardinals. They have turned the tables, so to speak, to appear that the Cardinals are in the wrong and have no basis to ask the questions and expect an answer.
Pope Bergoglio, by his silence, is creating for himself, and the Church, a grave crisis, perhaps Her gravest ever. The Cardinals have asked straight-forward questions that actually put Bergoglio in a corner. If he answers "no" then his program will be exposed as heretical and he will be compelled to withdraw it. If he answers "yes," then he will convict himself of making heretical statements. These are facts, they cannot be argued with.
The Cardinals, specifically, I should say, Cardinal Burke also opined that they would follow a course. You can be assured that before they even submitted the dubia to Bergoglio, they knew what they would be required to do and the risk that they were taking in making it public - an act totally justified in Scripture, I should add. Dr. John R.
T. Lamont is a Canadian Catholic philosopher and theologian. He studied
philosophy and theology at the Dominican College in Ottawa and at Oxford
University, and has taught philosophy and theology in Catholic universities and
seminaries. He is the author of Divine Faith (Ashgate, 2004), and of a number
of academic papers; his academic website is at
https://acu-au.academia.edu/JohnLamont. He writes at Rorate Caeli blog and article: "Consideration on the dubia of the four Cardinals." It is long and requires some thoughtful reading. I give you below, the summation.
Various explanations have been
proposed of how a Pope can be removed from office if he commits the canonical
crime of heresy. The explanations seek to explain how the Pope can lose office
without being judged by any of his inferiors in the Church on earth. The
simplest and possibly the best explanation that has been offered is that the
Pope by pertinaciously maintaining heresy effectively removes himself from
office. However, all these explanations agree that a Pope who is juridically
guilty of heresy can and must be removed from office. There is no dispute among
Catholic theologians on this point – even among theologians like Bellarmine who
do not think that a Pope is in fact capable of being a heretic. It is to
be hoped that the correction of Pope Francis does not have to proceed this far,
and that he will either reject the heresies he has announced or resign his
office. Removing him from office against his will would require the election of
a new Pope, and would probably leave the Church with Francis as an anti-Pope
contesting the authority of the new Pope. If Francis refuses to renounce either
his heresy or his office, however, this situation will just have to be faced.
Raymond Cardinal Burke, was, until being literally fired by the Bishop of Rome, the Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura. As I wrote yesterday, think of this as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. It is that equivalency. Raymond Leo Burke is arguable the greatest canonist alive today. Therefore, when he speaks, understand that he does so with full knowledge of Canon Law and history.
In a jaw-dropping interview in the National Catholic Register with Edward Pentin, Cardinal Burke lays out clearly the situation. I highly recommend you go there and read it all, but I wish to reprint here, for your understanding, exactly what these four cardinals, and we should presume they are speaking for others, are doing.
Pentin: What happens if the Holy Father does not respond to your act
of justice and charity and fails to give the clarification of the Church’s
teaching that you hope to achieve?
Card. Burke: Then we would have to address that situation. There is, in
the Tradition of the Church, the practice of correction of the Roman Pontiff.
It is something that is clearly quite rare. But if there is no response to
these questions, then I would say that it would be a question of taking a
formal act of correction of a serious error.
Pentin: In a conflict between ecclesial authority and the Sacred
Tradition of the Church, which one is binding on the believer and who has the
authority to determine this?
Card. Burke: What’s binding is the Tradition. Ecclesial authority exists
only in service of the Tradition. I think of that passage of St. Paul in the
[Letter to the] Galatians (1:8), that if “even an angel should preach unto you
any Gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema.”
Pentin: If the Pope were to teach grave error or heresy, which
lawful authority can declare this and what would be the consequences?
Cardinal Burke: It is the duty in such cases, and historically it has
happened, of cardinals and bishops to make clear that the Pope is teaching
error and to ask him to correct it.
There is another question coming. We will assume Edward Pentin did not ask it out of prudence or if was asked, it was certainly not answered. That question is this:
And if at that point, the Pope refuses to correct it; what then?
Amoris Laetitia, is not and can not be "magisterial teaching" because it contains heresy and error and that cannot be magisterial. Not Ordinary. Not Extraordinary!
Cardinal Burke is and was always correct.
This is Bergoglio's undoing. It is the warning shot that will end in his conversion or his exposition as a heretic.
Nick Donnelly 
