Cardinal Burke: Media hijacking Synod on the Family

cna ^ | September 23, 2014 | Ann Schneible

[NYer]

Ping!

[Alex Murphy]

“I don’t think you have to be brilliant to see that the media has, for months, been trying to hijack this Synod,” said Cardinal Raymond Burke, prefect for the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura – the office which, among other things, handles annulment cases in the Church. In particular, he told CNA in a recent interview, the media has been presenting Pope Francis as being in favor of allowing Holy Communion to be distributed to those who are divorced and remarried, and other such propositions, even though this is not the case. The danger, Cardinal Burke continued, is that “the media has created a situation in which people expect that there are going to be these major changes which would, in fact, constitute a change in Church teaching, which is impossible.” “That’s why it’s very important for those who are in charge to be very clear,” he said.

Related threads:
Exile to Malta for Cardinal Burke
The possible demotion of Card. Burke. Wherein Fr. Z rants.
Breaking: Sources confirm Cardinal Burke will be removed. But will he attend the Synod?
Exile to Malta for Cardinal Burke

[John O]

“It simply makes no sense to talk about mercy which doesn’t respect truth. How can that be merciful?” Cardinal Burke

Now this is a quote worth stealing. It can be used in all sorts of discussions where it will drive liberals crazy.

A question for the Catholics out there. How does the church handle adultery? Is the wronged partner released from the marriage and free to remarry or does the church hold them still married.

[Oratam]

Veni, creator Spiritus

[af_vet_1981]

How does the church handle adultery? Is the wronged partner released from the marriage and free to remarry or does the church hold them still married.

This article may shed some light on the subject for you.The Catholic attitude on marriage is not debatable for anyone who is really willing to live by the doctrine of the Scriptures.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Thank God at least some in the Vatican understand the MSM and what they’re up to.

Sure wish the Republican Party had somebody like that.

[Salvation]

For later.

[cloudmountain]

Thank God at least some in the Vatican understand the MSM and what they’re up to.
Sure wish the Republican Party had somebody like that.

Mitt Romney? Hard for me to vote for a Mormon, even though Romney is a nice guy and probably would have been a good president. Hindsight is always 20-20. Who knows.
The Mormon faith says that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers.

See anyone here that JUMPS out as presidential fodder?

==============================================

Sen. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.) — Ayotte, who is up for reelection in 2016, is already being discussed as a vice presidential pick.

Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.) — Tea Party favorite has said she might run again in 2016.

Former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour — Barbour is well liked by the GOP establishment and was included in a Republican National Committee straw poll in January.

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.)

Blackburn denied a report she is mulling a bid.

John Bolton — The former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations is leaving the 2016 door open.

Scott Brown — Brown is the underdog in his race against Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.).

Jeb Bush — Bush fatigue would be a significant obstacle for the former Florida governor.

Herman Cain — Jon Stewart prayed on the air that Cain would run again.

Ben Carson: Carson is a rising star in the GOP.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie — Bridge-gate hasn’t deterred Christie, who sounds like he’s going to be a candidate.

Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) — Tea Party star must convince kingmakers that he can beat Clinton.

Mitch Daniels — The ex-governor of Indiana decided against running in 2012 because of family concerns.

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin — The former House member is in the mix of speculation.

Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam — He says he’s not interested in running.

Newt Gingrich — The 2012 presidential candidate and ex-Speaker might run again. Asked by Fox News’s Greta van Susteren about throwing his hat in the ring, Gingrich responded, “Ask me that in January of 2015.”

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley — Haley is always mentioned as a possible candidate.

Mike Huckabee: Huckabee’s poll numbers are quite good.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal — The former House member knows policy inside and out, but he would have to stand out amid the many personalities that will be on the 2016 stage.

Ohio Gov. John Kasich — Will Kasich and Ohio Sen. Rob Portman both run? Regardless, Ohio is a must win for the GOP in 2016.

Rep. Pete King (N.Y.) — A frequent critic of Sens.

Ted Cruz (Texas) and Rand Paul (Ky.).

Rep. Steve King (Iowa) — A kingmaker in Iowa and a hard-liner on immigration.

New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez: The first female Hispanic governor is not expected to run for president. But she will be a leading vice presidential candidate.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (Wash.) — She has a bright future, though a presidential run in 2016 probably isn’t in the cards.

Sarah Palin — The RNC put her in its straw poll, but most think the former Alaska governor will remain on the sidelines.

Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) — Paul, who is up for reelection in 2016, looks like a sure bet to run for president. Of all the possible 2016 GOP hopefuls, Paul has arguably had the best 2014.

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence — Pence is a dark horse who shouldn’t be overlooked. The former House member was Tea Party before the Tea Party existed and is well respected by social and fiscal conservatives.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry: Comebacks are common in politics, but can Perry pull it off? He has two things going for him: The border crisis has put him front and center on the national stage, and the right has rallied behind him in the wake of his indictment in Texas.

Sen. Rob Portman (Ohio) — Portman, who is up for reelection in 2016, is headed to New Hampshire next week.

Condoleezza Rice — The former secretary of State routinely comes up in this conversation, but the chances of a Rice bid are remote.

Rep. Mike Rogers (Mich.) — The retiring House member and soon-to-be talk-radio host hasn’t ruled out a run.

Mitt Romney — The rumors of another Romney run continue to persist.

Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) - Rubio will have to decide whether to run for president or reelection in 2016. As he said, “you can’t be on the ballot for two different offices” in Florida.

Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.) — He seems more intent on becoming Ways and Means Committee chairman than running for president.

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval — It’s more likely that Sandoval would challenge Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) in 2016.

Rick Santorum: The former Pennsylvania senator is being overlooked in the 2016 race. He did, after all, win the Iowa caucus in 2012.

Joe Scarborough — The host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” is certainly eyeing a return to public office. Will it come sooner or later?

Sen. Tim Scott (S.C.) — He probably won’t run but will be discussed as a possible No. 2 on the ticket.

Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder — He faces a challenging reelection race in November.

Sen. John Thune (S.D.) — Thune nearly ran in 2012, and he has more than $9.5 million in his campaign war chest.

Donald Trump —Trump might run, but don’t bet on it.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker — Walker first has to win reelection this year.

Allen West — The former congressman from Florida is mulling a bid.

[Salvation]

**All things considered, Cardinal Burke told CNA that the Synod on the Family can be a good thing, “as long as it’s firmly grounded in the Church’s doctrine and discipline regarding marriage. But it cannot simply be a kind of sentimental or personal approach that doesn’t respect the objective reality of marriage.”

“To the degree that all of it is solidly grounded in the Church’s teaching and her discipline, I believe it will be very positive,” he said.**

May God render it so.

[defconw]

I pray he’s right.

[annalex]

The Church would advise that the spouses separate in some circumstances. Typically, spousal abuse and adultery are grounds for separation, unless the wrongdoer obtains forgiveness from the spouse and eradicates the problem.

Once separated, the spouses may seek legal protection for themselves, their children and their property, i.e. obtain legal divorce under the laws that the state may have.

However, neither of that dissolves the marriage. In the eye of God the separated spouses (whether legally divorced or not) remain married. Neither of them may re-marry. That is regardless of the allocation of guilt for the separation.

The only thing that may allow a former spouse to re-marry is if the marriage is declared null. But grounds for annulment are not the same as grounds for divorce. Annulment is possible if (1) it is sought and (2) a defect can be pointed out in the initiation of the marriage. Defects of spousal life after the marriage was properly initiated are not grounds for annulment. For example, if the marriage was not initiated freely (a spouse was coerced) or fraudulent (a spouse was already married and have no right to marry) or not intended as a traditional life-long monogamous union of a man and a woman open to parenthood, then these might be initial defects and ground for annulment.

So adultery may play a role in the annulment process insofar as it points to the lack of intent to form a union of mutual fidelity. Other frequently occurring defects these days that may lead to annulment are lack of intent to have children or openness to a divorce and a second marriage after a while. However, in itself adultery is not grounds for annulment, and without annulment neither spouse is free to marry.

Note also that annulment does not impute that the union was sinful while it lasted, nor confer illegitimacy on the children so long as the spouses assumed, albeit incorrectly, that their marriage was real.

[af_vet_1981]

See anyone here that JUMPS out as presidential fodder?

Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas)

[bboop]

Scott Walker is tried and tested in the fire. The man does not waiver, but sets a goal, ignores obstacles, fights tooth and nail for what is right. I admire him a great deal. (Before we get into ‘what he thinks about this and that,’ I don’t care if I agree with someone enough to marry him.) I care about integrity, grit, courage of convictions.

Ben Carson is also on my short list.

I like Tex Governor Rick Perry.

I have been impressed by Trey Gowdy.

Mitt Romney does not have enough fire to win, imho.

[John O]

Thanks for the answer.

So it seems that if your spouse commits adultery against you, that the only choice you have if you want to be happily married for the rest of your life, is to have them killed. (which of course would end the marriage) :)

(I realize that reconciliation is the ideal, but I also know that in the bible God gives us permission to divorce in cases of adultery (one spuse already ended the marriage). Sometimes the trust required for marriage cannot be rebuilt.)

[af_vet_1981]

I also know that in the bible God gives us permission to divorce in cases of adultery (one spuse already ended the marriage).

That is not what the scripture says. Adultery is not mentioned as the only permissible cause for divorce.

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

[piusv]

“I don’t think you have to be brilliant to see that the media has, for months, been trying to hijack this Synod,” said Cardinal Raymond Burke, prefect for the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura – the office which, among other things, handles annulment cases in the Church.

That would be former prefect for the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura.

And isn't it interesting...I did not know that that office handles annulments. Interesting, indeed.

Despite his saying that the media been trying to hijack the Synod, he is on record for criticizing Kasper's comments (which were reported by this same meany media).

[piusv]

As current prelate of the Apostolic Signatura, Cardinal Burke's role at the synod will particularly pertain to the marriage nullity process, specifically in light of the suggestion to streamline the process of annulments, making it faster and easier.

Gee, things just seem to be getting more interesting......

[stanne]

The former couple can make an inquiry on annulment. If the marriage is found to have been non sacramental it is annulled and they’re no longer married in the church

The adulterer is culpable for the adultery (which is a serious/mortal sin)

That person can seek another marriage if someone’s dopey enough to get involved but they are free to change their ways

[NYer]

So it seems that if your spouse commits adultery against you, that the only choice you have if you want to be happily married for the rest of your life, is to have them killed. (

Totally wrong! A marriage tribunal considers many factors in determining the validity of a marriage. Among these are the conditions under which the couple originally married; did they understand what constitutes a valid marriage; were they both open to having children; did they attend Pre Cana classes; etc.

Too often, couples enter marriage for unusual reasons. An example of this might be in order for a foreigner to obtain a green card. Some couples do it for the party with little or no reflection on the seriousness of the vows exchanged, as crazy as that may seem. There are a multitude of reasons why, what to all the world appears to be a marriage, really is not. A tribunal poses the questions and examines the evidence to make that determination. It is amazing just how many catholics who enter into "marriage" are totally ignorant of the commitment it entails. They think they are in love and, in their minds, that is justification enough. Pre Cana classes are intended to clarify any misunderstandings, here again, some couples fail to attend those classes. It is much more than adultery!