Lots of lefties are hopping up and down in little circles because the Four Cardinals (Burke, Caffara, Meisner, Brandmueller) offered Five Dubia (questions, narrowly framed, asking for yes or no clarificatory responses) arising from the objective lack of clarity in Chapter 8 of Amoris laetitia. As these catholic libs, chimp-like, fling their stuff around, Card. Burke continues to give interviews in an attempt to bring sobriety to the debate.
Today I saw an interview dated 11 January in the Italian publication La Verità. Card. Burke is asked some tough questions and he gives straight on answers. Asked whether they are “inventing” a way to correct formally the Pope, Burke answered “Of course not.” But he points out that, in the past, Popes have been corrected. He sustains that it is an “error” to say that, in certain cases, the divorced and remarried living in more uxorio, can receive Communion. He doesn’t think that that is a heresy, but an error:
“No, it seems to me that it can qualify as an error, but we are dealing with a complex situation. Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt, on the part of the baptized, of a truth that one must believe by divine and Catholic faith. One heresy could be that of one who sustains that there do not exist intrinsically evil acts; to affirm this would be to say something contrary to the doctrine of the Church and would clearly be a heresy. The affirmation about access to the sacraments of which we were speaking a while ago, on the other hand, refers to a practice (prassi) that contradicts two doctrines: that of indissolubility of matrimony and that of the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. At first glance we can say that certainly it’s an error.”
Card. Burke confirms that the Four Cardinals are united and that he knows many cardinals who are with them.
The accusations – open from some and veiled from … another – flung at them pretty much roll off his back.
In regard to the accusation that the Four are “doctors of the law” (an insult leveled by Pope Francis at those who resist antinomianism):
“It seems to me that the moral law isn’t something that imprisons a person; it is quite the opposite: the moral law frees a person and orients him to fulfill the good. In fact, when there is no respect for moral law there come about chaotic situations and morally there results a kind of imprisonment. For people of faith, we have to say that the divine law frees, and it is not a negative thing. And then to teach moral law is a great act of charity towards one’s neighbor, because it points to the path of authentic freedom and happiness. It is impossible to affirm that a person can find some form of happiness in sinning.”
He was asked:
Q: Why so much noise for a problem that many have a hard time understanding?
BURKE: We are dealing here with a question that concerns the Church in a profound way: matrimony and family, which is its fruit, and they constitute the foundation of the very life of the Church. Our task is not to lose ourselves in difficult or vague questions; we are simply giving our contribution to the growth of the Church in the most elementary cell of life.