The “Correction” That Wasn’t One?


Cardinal Burke is here seen in the act of surrendering


I have already written that in this just begun 2017 we will have to get accustomed to a lot of absurd talk. It seems to me the recent interview of the Remnant with Cardinal Burke constitutes another example. 

Let us leave aside Burke’s initial triple salto mortale, when he states again (make no mistake: to try to justify five months of shameful inaction) that Amoris Laetitia  “is not an exercise of the papal magisterium” – an obvious, blatant contradiction with his actions from September on – . What I would like to focus on today is the following Q&A. 

MJM: So what’s next, Your Eminence? If Pope Francis fails to answer your dubia, what’s the next course of action? You’ve spoken of the possibility of elevating this to a formal correction. But what exactly does that look like?

Cardinal Burke: Well, it doesn’t look too much differently than the dubia. In other words, the truths that seem to be called into question by AL would simply be placed alongside what the Church has always taught and practiced and annunciated in the official teaching of the Church. And in this way these errors would be corrected. Does that make sense to you?

No, it does not make sense to me. It does not make sense to me because it does not make sense at all.  

A correction is, by definition, the stating of what is wrong together with the affirmation of what is right. My teachers at school did not write the correct spelling alongside the wrong one; they barred the wrong spelling, and put the right one in its place.  That was wrong, but this is right.

What the Cardinal is stating now equates to saying – and I do not see any other interpretation of this – that the Cardinals would publish a statement of what is right without even daring to explicitly say what is wrong with Amoris Laetitia.

This is not a correction. This is not even a criticism. This is first-class V II meowing.

Such an exercise does not need to be preceded by Dubia. The Cardinals could have done it anytime. Such a reaction would, actually, justify the criticism that the Dubia were uncalled for in the first place.  In short: Cardinal Burke’s answer is utter baloney. 

The only logical consequence of the refusal of the Pope to answer the Dubia is the open condemnation of the relevant AL points as heretical, and the rebuke of the Pope who refused to set things right by answering the Dubia.    

From this another logical necessity follows: that if the Pope keeps refusing to answer the Dubia and openly set things right, he must be declared a heretic himself.

It’s as simple as that. There is no escape from it. If Cardinal Burke thought he did not have the mettle for this, he was a fool in issuing the Dubia in the first place, much less publishing them.

I have been criticised for being sceptical about Cardinal Burke. But the fact is that I do not have a high degree of confidence in someone who, after an unprecedented attack to the faith, first criticises those who want to defend it and then awaits five months before he does something. This interview is, to me, another demonstration that Cardinal Burke must earn the confidence of faithful Catholics rather than think that, as he is one of the very few prelates meowing, the faithful will stand in awe in front of such magnificence.

No, the Cardinal’s plan does not make sense at all. It is the worst of V II cowardice and betrayal of Truth. It is like a government issuing an ultimatum and then, when the ultimatum is not complied with, proceeding to declare “disagreement” instead of war. It’s a loss of face, and the man is a fool if he thinks he can meow and be hailed as a Catholic lion. If he does what he says he will lose face, big time. Not for the first time. 

Do not put your faith in any V II prelate until he has earned it, no matter how long his cappa magna.  

These here are fair-weather shepherds. 






Posted on January 12, 2017, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 14 Comments.

  1. Sounds like the dubia business is going to end with a whimper as our “champions” abandon the field of battle. Let us pray that this is not the case. But more and more it is looking like divine intervention is the only answer as even Our Lady of Fatima couldn’t persuade the powers that be in the Vatican. It may very be that the ‘powers that be’ in the Vatican are those of the devil.

  2. “We have been very clear to the Assad regime — but also to other players on the ground — that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.”

  3. Dear Mundabor, Check out another dubia from Mary’s Advocates to renowned canonist, Edward Peters. “Could a good argument be made that priests who condone divorce in the confessional are also committing the crime of solicitation in confession?”

  4. ilovevictoriasbows

    So the next question is, who all gets to decide to label the evil clown a heretic? Is it a vote? Forgone conclusion how Cupich, Kasper, et al, cast their ballots. Who steps up to the plate, Burke? Aren’t we still outnumbered with effeminates and jelly backs quivering in their cassocks?

  5. I agree with the overall gist of your post, and it’s a very important message. But we need to always be in service of truth, so I must say that even though you are right, in my opinion, in your main criticism of Burke, you are mistaken on one point. In that interview back in April, Burke was NOT criticizing the defenders of orthodoxy; he was criticizing the progressives. I am sorry to see that misinterpretation of his comments still being perpetuated.

    The comment that has been misinterpreted is this:

    “While the Roman pontiff has personal reflections that are interesting and can be inspiring, the Church must be ever attentive to point out that their publication is a personal act and not an exercise of the papal magisterium. Otherwise, those who do not understand the distinction, or do not want to understand it, will present such reflections and even anecdotal remarks of the pope as declarations of a change in the Church’s teaching, to the great confusion of the faithful.”

    Burke here is referring to the liberals who so eagerly took AL and ran with it, insisting that NOW, finally, the Church was saying that adulterous couples were not really adulterous and could receive Holy Communion.

  6. Sorry, I was unclear with my verbs in my last sentence. I meant to say: the liberals who so eagerly took AL and ran with it, AND WHO INSISTED that NOW, finally, the Church was saying…

  7. I think the bishops will do the same nothing they’ve done for decades when the faithful demand they show some courage. They’ll chirp “Automatic excommunication!” and explain earnestly, with their holy face on, that they really don’t have to do anything at all, because IF someone commits heresy, or schism, or apostasy, he automatically excommunicates himself. No need for any messy hearings or trials or activity of any kind – it’s all automatic! That’s how they’ve dealt with abortion for decades now, even with notorious public advocates in politics. I wonder why we need them at all, if the Holy Ghost is a sort of perpetual motion machine that just operates without anyone having to do a thing.

  8. The Cardinal’s understanding of AL is likely broader that of a typical layman, or even that of most theologians. As a prince of the Church he is duty bound to preserve the papacy, but at the same time persevere in the faith even if it means to challenge the Pope if the good of the Church demands it. In other words he has to walk a fine line, but that is not to be mistaken for cowardice. His knowledge of canon law enables him to see the path forward through the obstacles and tempest, and he is negotiating that path prayerfully with clarity of intellect and a firm purpose. I believe he understands perfectly that it rests upon his shoulders to take the lead in stating the clear teachings of the Church while simultaneously avoiding, if possible, the language of division. That said, however, when and if the time comes when there is no other choice, when all entreaties have been rebuffed and every option ignored or rejected, he will then in my opinion act decisively and he will do so without hesitation. That time will probably be sooner than later.

    Early in the Remnant interview Cardinal Burke is asked what he foresaw for the Church if the clarification of AL is not given. His response: “It would be very devastating”. He further states that if the Church “were simply to accept the way of our culture with regard to marriage , then she would have betrayed herself and her Lord and Master, and that we simply can’t permit”. And later he states the “confusion has to addressed and remedied”. This does not sound like a prelate ready to throw in the towel, but rather someone who understands the gravity of the matter in its entirety. We must pray for him.

  1. Pingback: Canon212 Update: Combative, Bad-Tempered, Idealistic, Vengeful, And Free Of Charge – The Stumbling Block

%d bloggers like this: