Posted on 11/16/2016 4:06:25 AM PST by marshmallow
The cardinal said there was a tradition of issuing a formal correction if a Pope is in error
Cardinal Raymond Burke has said it may be necessary to make a “formal act of correction” if Pope Francis doesn’t answer a letter from four cardinals asking him to clarify aspects of Amoris Laetitia.
In an interview with Edward Pentin of National Catholic Register, Cardinal Burke said that if the Pope were to teach error or heresy, “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.”
Cardinal Burke is one of four cardinals who have written to the Pope asking for a clarification of Amoris Laetitia. They say that the document could be read as contradicting Church teaching on the moral law and on the question of Communion for the remarried. The Pope has declined to reply to the letter.
Asked what would happen if the Pope remained silent, Cardinal Burke replied: “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.”
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicherald.co.uk ...
I will say it. Cardinals, bishops and priests committed crimes and they should have been severely punished. But remember, their crimes went against Catholic teaching and discipline. There is corruption in every organization, even in your church. The proper response is to return to what the Church actually teaches. In the area sexual abuse this is what the Catholic Church has done. These abuse are no longer tolerated. Why will you not acknowledge it?
Furthermore, why should I have to list abuse after abuse after abuse..when as an expert historian you know all about them.
Your post makes it seem as if there is only one example. WHY didn’t you say ONE ORDER AMONG MANY instead of lording your expertise and thus trying to imply I didn’t name any others so there must not be any others. A CARDINAL EVEN ACCUSED ANOTHER CARDINAL
You didn’t say it. The expert historian keeps saying.
The excuse that it happens everywhere is not an excuse.
It is not acceptable anywhere...And I surely don’t understand the Pope and his views on Muslims given what they believe..but that is another thing.
There is corruption at the high levels in the Catholic Church. It seems to me that has often been the case throughout history. (plus politics)
But then again..I don’t have time to go into the Banking Scandal.
To a layman, a Cardinal is higher level than a bishop so as you are excusing the Catholic Church you keep using the term bishop instead of what they are known as to try to obfuscate.
The use of the word CARDINAL gives it more gravitas.
I am not going down this rabbit hole any longer with you
THERE IS EVIL IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Sodano was EVIL. HE was a DEAN Of the CARDINALS. THAT IS A HIGH POWERED POSITION. HE BLOCKED ANOTHER CARDINAL FROM INVESTIGATING SEXUAL ABUSE.
IF YOU ARE A TRUE CATHOLIC..THE LAVENDER MAFIA SHOULD BE EVIL TO YOU. But you still haven’t acknowledged they exist.
I am done with this.
“Also why do you keep pretending that a Cardinal is on the same level as a Bishop.”
Show me where I “pretend” that. You will fail by the way.
“They aren’t on the same level.”
No one here is claiming they are. These cardinals in question, however, are BISHOPS. Covered in post #73. Nothing else you’re saying changes that.
“The Dean of the Cardinals is not the same thing as a lowly bishop in the US.”
They are both bishops. Covered in post #73.
“Btw, what about the Lavender Mafia. Are you going to claim it doesn’t exit?”
No. Why are your posts getting progressively more bizarre and ridiculous? Are you getting even more desperate perhaps? I was the one who posted about Fr. Rueda’s book.
“If it does exist, how does that square with Catholic teachings”
It squares with it as much as any other sinful activity - not at all. And that just leads us back to post #73. See, it’s not about politics. It’s about SIN.
“Furthermore, why should I have to list abuse after abuse after abuse..when as an expert historian you know all about them.”
There’s no “should” or “have to” when it comes to what you must post - other than your posts should and have to make sense and they don’t. You keep posting whines about how you are being forced to post this or that and no one is forcing you to do ANYTHING. What is with you?
“Your post makes it seem as if there is only one example.”
No. There you go again twisting what was posted. You - THAT’S YOU - posted about Sodan and ONE order in one post and I responded by telling you it was ONE order. That hasn’t changed. That post is about ONE order. And nothing in that post - OR IN ANY OTHER OF YOUR POSTS - changes anything I wrote in post #73. Everything I said there is still absolutely true and is not overturned by anything you have posted since.
“WHY didn’t you say ONE ORDER AMONG MANY”
Because the post was about ONE ORDER. ONE. Can you read that word? ONE. And whether one or ten it changes NOTHING I wrote. It’s all in post #73. You asked for it and I gave it to you and you have refused to actually deal with it in any detail ever since.
“instead of lording your expertise and thus trying to imply I didn’t name any others so there must not be any others.”
There you go again making things up. So seemingly desperate.
“A CARDINAL EVEN ACCUSED ANOTHER CARDINAL”
Bishops. Covered in post #73. Thanks for proving my point.
“To a layman, a Cardinal is higher level than a bishop so as you are excusing the Catholic Church you keep using the term bishop instead of what they are known as to try to obfuscate.”
Nope. My post #73 says it all just about. Cardinal or ordinary - they’re both bishops. And I am a layman so you’re wrong on your statement there. Also, anyone who reads post #73 could not POSSIBLY come away from that thinking I am “excusing” or “try[ing] to obfuscate” for anyone, anything or about anyone or anything. It’s just that simple.
“The use of the word CARDINAL gives it more gravitas.”
Oh, geez. Bishops. No cardinal has any more authroity in any diocese in the world than any oridanry does. That’s just a fact.
“I am not going down this rabbit hole any longer with you”
It’s not a hole. It’s a warren, a warren of your own creation. You dug it out all by yourself. Everything I posted has been true and accurate.
“THERE IS EVIL IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.”
There is evil in the hearts of men (Matthew 15:19).
“Sodano was EVIL. HE was a DEAN Of the CARDINALS. THAT IS A HIGH POWERED POSITION. HE BLOCKED ANOTHER CARDINAL FROM INVESTIGATING SEXUAL ABUSE.”
You’re talking about three bishops. Bishops. Covered in Post #73.
“IF YOU ARE A TRUE CATHOLIC..THE LAVENDER MAFIA SHOULD BE EVIL TO YOU. But you still haven’t acknowledged they exist.”
Have you really acknowledged post #73? Also, does my acknowledging an evil that is not mine change its status? I need not discuss every evil in the world - or any pet evil you seem bizarrely focused on - to do what is right.
“I am done with this”
Believe me you were done before this started.
“You didn’t say it. The expert historian keeps saying.”
Are you referring to me? If you are referring to me why do you refuse to properly name me in the recipient line? This is the third or fourth time you’ve done this? Why do you repeatedly do what the religion moderators in the past have said someone should not do?
Not all Cardinals are bishops and your refusal to address them as Cardinal and just saying Bishop would not go over well.
You keep pretending all Cardinals are bishops and that is just not the case. ..and you know it as an historian
The Sexual Abuse coverup has involved EVERY type of person in the heirchy with the possible exception of The Pope. I personally don’t believe none of them knew.
And know Australia has come out with their findings on a top Vatican Cardinal and trusted aide to the Pope - Pell. Not favorable and now we wait to see if they are going to press charges. Australia may charge him.
And yes, the Lavender Mafia exists.(and it is political..they will threaten you) So that is another EVIL if you are a true Catholic. Not all Catholics are Evil. But there are high ranking people within that Church who are EVIL and should be judged for there deeds instead of pretending they don't exist.
You said you were done with this, but apparently you can’t help yourself.
“You keep pretending all Cardinals are bishops”
No. Not every single Cardinal in the world is a bishop. But all the Cardinals who you’ve mentioned have been bishops and all the Cardinals who matter in the sex abuse scandals have been bishops. And the issue of bishops was covered in post #73 - which you refuse to deal with.
“and that is just not the case. ..and you know it as an historian”
Again, every Cardinal you mentioned is a bishop. EVERY SINGLE ONE. My point still stands. I never claimed ALL cardinals everywhere were bishops. Remember, post #25: “Four cardinals disagreeing with the pope.” All bishops. No where in post #73 did I claim all cardinals everywhere were bishops. You mentioned Pell in #74 - he’s a Cardinal Bishop. But then you said in post #76, “It’s not just Bishops that covered it up. It is also Cardinals and Archbishops.” And that changed NOTHING I said. In post #81 I pointed out: “Whether Cardinal or Archbishop - they were ALL bishops. That’s why I used the proper title - “bishops”.”
I have been right all along.
“Not all Cardinals are bishops and your refusal to address them as Cardinal and just saying Bishop would not go over well.”
It’s going over just fine - because what I posted was true: Post #81: “Whether Cardinal or Archbishop - they were ALL bishops. That’s why I used the proper title - “bishops”.”
Cardinal Bishop is not the same thing as Bishop.
But hey, go call your Cardinal a bishop if you ever get to meet him. It will be frowned upon. In fact, I bet you wouldn’t just use the term BISHOP
Pope Francis is the Catholic church’s Obama.
To the extent that Peter was playing to the crowd, yes, it was politics. Paul was trying to bring it back into the realm of religion.
Francis appears to be playing to the crowd of public morality. That is politics. The move by the Cardinals, apparently, is to bring it back to the realm of religion.
“Cardinal Bishop is not the same thing as Bishop.”
They’re bishops. Covered in post #73. That’s the point.
“But hey, go call your Cardinal a bishop if you ever get to meet him.”
He would rather I call him “Father” than anything else since he only wanted to be a simple parish priest. And he would be the first one to say a Cardinal Bishop IS A BISHOP.
“It will be frowned upon.”
Oh, no, not the dreaded frown? The horrors!
“In fact, I bet you wouldn’t just use the term BISHOP”
I would call him Cardinal - even though I know he longs to just be a parish priest - and none of that changes the fact that he IS A BISHOP.
All the Cardinals you mentioned were BISHOPS. Nothing you can say will change that. This was covered in post #73.
Case closed.
You went from saying this was politics, to sex abuse cases, to sex abuse cover ups, to not all cardinals are bishops. You proved NOTHING. You were flat out wrong in many of your posts. You made things up out of thin air. You accused me of lying - which is not only absolutely untrue but is a violation of board rules. You refused to ping me even when you were discussing things I posted (or things you ascribed to me that I never posted) - which the mods here have said before should not be done. You might want to take stock and ask yourself why you did these things.
They all stemmed from the marriage question however. And, as you said before you pretended to know the Popes mind and heart...he was unclear. He goofed in my opinion, he knows he goofed and hence rather than argue is going to have the Cardinals act. That is healthy for the Church in my opinion.
I will not pretend to KNOW his heart, but I cannot help but think he has a very loving heart...not for the earthly desires as you imply but for Jesus Christ and the creation.
I do not believe global warming, if it is occurring is man’s fault, but I have long believed good stewardship of God’s creation is a joy in Jesus heart whereas tarnishing (polluting) is a tear in God’s eye.
There are things we can disagree with a person without vilifying him/her. When it comes to the Pope I think it is especially important. God did put him there after all.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you, I think he oversteps but it is from love base, not politically motivated I believe.
There will be repercussions for these Cardinals if they don’t take out the Pope..so to speak.
But hey, I will bookmark your post and come back to you when those repercussions manifest...
Btw, for those that claim MONEY never enters into the Sexual abuse cover up...
EXACTLY where did the money go that was given to Sodano?
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/549/the_allegations_against_cardinal_sodano.aspx
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.