Cardinal Burke: Here’s What the Formal Correction of Pope Francis Will Look Like

LifeSite News ^ | 8/16/17 | Pete Baklinski

[marshmallow]

August 16, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) -- Since Pope Francis has chosen not to respond to the five questions on whether his Exhortation Amoris Laetitia conforms to Catholic teaching, a “correction” of the ways his teaching departs from the Catholic faith is “necessary,” said Cardinal Raymond Burke in a new interview.

The Cardinal, who is one of the four who signed the dubia almost one year ago asking the Pope to clarify his teaching, explained in an interview with The Wanderer how the process for issuing a “formal correction” would proceed.

“It seems to me that the essence of the correction is quite simple,” Burke explained.

“On the one hand, one sets forth the clear teaching of the Church; on the other hand, what is actually being taught by the Roman Pontiff is stated. If there is a contradiction, the Roman Pontiff is called to conform his own teaching in obedience to Christ and the Magisterium of the Church,” he said.

“The question is asked, ‘How would this be done?’ It is done very simply by a formal declaration to which the Holy Father would be obliged to respond. Cardinals Brandmüller, Caffarra, Meisner, and I used an ancient institution in the Church of proposing dubia to the Pope,” the Cardinal continued.

“This was done in a very respectful way and not in any way to be aggressive, in order to give him the occasion to set forth the Church’s unchanging teaching. Pope Francis has chosen not to respond to the five dubia, so it is now necessary simply to state what the Church teaches about marriage, the family, acts that are intrinsically evil, and so forth. These are the points that are not clear in the current teachings of the Roman Pontiff; therefore, this situation must be corrected. The correction would then.....

[ebb tide]

Thank GOD! they [Luther and Francis] do not mess with morals or doctrine!

So you can do without morals and doctrine?

[imardmd1]

Note the lettering at the bottom of the pyramid. It is a man-contrived system of numbering, characteristic of a Roman society. And that numbering system uses the letters D, C, L, X, V, and I. That denominated in Arabic decimal numerals is therefore:

DCLXVI = 666

All of them are found in the Roman numeral MDCCLXXVI, which in Arabic (Muslim) decimal system numerals is 1776. For your information, it is on every U. S. dollar bill, or implied by anything denominated in dollars. The bill is a document printed by the U. S. Treaury and is legal tender by which one may legally discharge any debt in terms of United States currency.

Are y'all getting this?

Rev 13:16-18 AV:

"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond,
to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast,
or the number of his name.
Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast:
for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six."

(1) In the above, the translation is not quite right, and the typical interpretation that it refers to a human's name is a misguided concept. "Number" refers to the system of numerals by which a quantity is defined in that language.

(2) "His" is the wrong pronoun grammatically. In the Greek it is neuter, meaning "its," not "his" in this passage.

(3) And "name" means "authority" or "authorization," not a human's given name.

(4)And here is the mark, authorized by the "beast," the symbol of the currency system:

$

It is denominated by the designation "USD" which is U. S. dollars.

(5) At this point, it is the global system by which wealth or debt is expressed.

======

Be advised.

[Elsie]

All of them are found in the Roman numeral MDCCLXXVI, which in Arabic (Muslim) decimal system numerals is 1776.

SATAN: all THESE letters are found in our ALPHABET; and can be re-arranged to spell SANTA!!!

[Elsie]

666 can be produced by pressing the key in THE MIDDLE of the keyboard on the TOP row!!!

[Elsie]

Are y'all getting this?

Not really.

It reminds me of...

Ya got trouble, folks,
right here in River City.
Trouble with a capital "T"
And that rhymes with "P"
and that stands for pool!

https://youtu.be/LI_Oe-jtgdI

[Elsie]

Are y'all getting this?

Not really.

It reminds me of...

Ya got trouble, folks,
right here in River City.
Trouble with a capital "T"
And that rhymes with "P"
and that stands for pool!

https://youtu.be/LI_Oe-jtgdI

[Elsie]

On the Great Seal

In 1782, Sam Adams created the third Congress and appointed a design artist, William Barton of Philadelphia, to bring a proposal for the national seal.^[3] For the reverse, Barton suggested a thirteen-layered pyramid underneath the Eye of Providence. The mottos which Barton chose to accompany the design were Deo Favente ("with God's favor", or more literally, "with God favoring") and Perennis ("Everlasting"). The pyramid and Perennis motto had come from a $50 Continental currency bill designed by Francis Hopkinson.^[4] (The note can be seen here, and the pyramid portion here.)

Barton's Design with Deo Favente and Perennis.

Barton explained that the motto alluded to the Eye of Providence: "Deo favente which alludes to the Eye in the Arms, meant for the Eye of Providence."^[5] In western art, God is traditionally represented by the Eye of Providence, which principally symbolizes God's omniscience.

When designing the final version of the Great Seal, Charles Thomson (a former Latin teacher) kept the pyramid and eye for the reverse side but replaced the two mottos, using Annuit Cœptis instead of Deo Favente (and Novus Ordo Seclorum instead of Perennis). When he provided his official explanation of the meaning of this motto, he wrote:

The Eye over it [the pyramid] and the motto Annuit Cœptis allude to the many signal interpositions of providence in favor of the American cause.^[6]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annuit_c%C5%93ptis

[Elsie]

Guess who...

[piusv]

How about calling a spade a spade? And stop pussy footing around.

[imardmd1]

What this shows is that our culture is just as much Greco-Roman in secular organization as it is Judeo-"Christific" in theology. Yet it is mixed with commonness of native-American/far-eastern orientalism/African-tribalism plus whatever-other-kind of "clay" that is predicted in Daniel 2:42-43 as the end-times composite of mixed, unblendable cultures that will eventually be superseded.

North America is not a "melting-pot" of cultures, but rather a trash-heap of the odds and ends of them all, not moldable, but generally organized along the lines of a democratic republic trending slowly toward mobocracy with the end being anarchy (which we are seeing plenty of now).

I believe anything truly Christian will be removed, and what is "left behind" will be reorganized by the global "catholic" principle (which is the operative concept of most North-American denominalizationalism) led by the Antichrist with his chief priest of Rome leading the takeover of the mid-East. And what is then still "united states" will be in the forefront with its technology and monetizing system.

Is Francis a forerunner to this?

Maybe.

Will revived orthodoxy figure into it?

Probably.

Will true Christians be involved?

No, they won't even be around anywhere on the Earth.

But the dollar will, necessary for buying and selling goods and influence.

[Elsie]

But the dollar will, necessary for buying and selling goods and influence.

If you can't buy or sell without the number; I'd imagine that 'dollars' will be obsolete as ONLY digital (tracking) transactions will take place.

[imardmd1]

If you can't buy or sell without the number; I'd imagine that 'dollars' will be obsolete as ONLY digital (tracking) transactions will take place.

Not so. Without dollar credits in one's account, the bar code (the mark) representing it, or the balance and ID number in one's memory that the bar code represents, would be invalid, either for the buyer or the seller. Otherwise one would have to be an officer speaking/signing for the government (the "beast" which issues the currency), or else authorized by it to make purchases or sell government property.

Elsie, you need to actually read what the passage says, rather than merely accept the meaning that the translators/interpreters gave you. They wouldn't have seen what you and I can see, or what Beloved John saw with heavenly help. Denominated in dollars, that is (which John couldn't see, although he was well aware of the Roman methods of arithmetic using the numerals that add up to 666), but which we can see, knowing how Daniel's eschatology worked out, and that we are still a child of the Roman Empire that ruled all of Europe, the Mid-East, and Northern Africa, still using currency that bears the imprint of its numeral system.

Also, I feel that Roman Catholicism still implicitly consists of the embodiment of the Holy Roman Empire. I would not doubt at all that it would like to be the dominating authority of our nation, and has been seeking it to rebuke the Protestant beginning and underpinning of our Christian American liberty through the years it has flourished more and more.

We'll see how Cardinal Burke makes out with his rebuke of the openness of his (South) American-born Pontiff.

[Elsie]

Yes. We both ‘see’ through a glass darkly.

I suggest we also use a VERY darkened glass to view the sun tomorrow!

[imardmd1]

Yes. We both ‘see’ through a glass darkly.

Not everyone. Some are just blinded to deduction from obvious information. Have you ever heard of the Miller Analogy Test?

[Elsie]

no