First, there is an interview with Card. Burke at LifeSite. In the summary before the interview itself:
Answering a question in which I remarked that “many Catholics are troubled by the text,” Cardinal Burke did not deny that some of the Exhortation’s elements are open to a non-orthodox interpretation, underscoring that these cannot be part of the magisterium. “I think the important thing is that when one reads critically the document, one is always respectful of the person of the Pope,” Cardinal Burke said, thus conceding that in itself a critical reading is not contrary to the Catholic faithful’s correct mindset.
“Some people criticized me for saying that the document is not magisterium; they said it was a Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation and, therefore, must be part of the magisterium; but the title of the document doesn’t give it the quality of magisterium. You have to read the contents and when you do, you see that this document has to be read critically in the light of the Catechism, in the light of the Church’s magisterium. Those parts which support and give full expression to the Church’s magisterium are fine, but there may be other things that are reflections of the Holy Father, but they are not magisterium.”
Also, at the National Catholic Register, the great Edward Pentin has posted a three part video interview with SSPX Bp. Bernard Fellay. The write up is HERE From the write up:
Reconciliation between the Society of St. Pius X and Rome looks to be imminent, as a key obstacle — opposition to certain aspects of the Second Vatican Council — may no longer be a cause for continued separation from the Church.
Bishop Bernard Fellay, the superior general of the SSPX, told the Register May 13 that he is “persuaded, at least in part, by a different approach,” in which, he believes, Pope Francis is placing less weight on the Council and more emphasis on “saving souls and finding a way to do it.”
Pope Francis had an interview at La Croix in French, but the English is available. HERE
– On April 1, you received Bishop Bernard Fellay, superior-general of the Priestly Fraternity of St Pius X. Is the re-integration of the Lefebvrists into the Church again under consideration?
Pope Francis: In Buenos Aires, I often spoke with them. They greeted me, asked me on their knees for a blessing. They say they are Catholic. They love the Church.
Bishop Fellay is a man with whom one can dialogue. That is not the case for other elements who are a little strange, such as Bishop Williamson or others who have been radicalized. Leaving this aside, I believe, as I said in Argentina, that they are Catholics on the way to full communion.
During this year of mercy, I felt that I needed to authorize their confessors to pardon the sin of abortion. They thanked me for this gesture. Previously, Benedict XVI, whom they greatly respect, had liberalized the use of the Tridentine rite mass. So good dialogue and good work are taking place.
– Would you be ready to grant them the status of a personal prelature?
Pope Francis: That would be a possible solution but beforehand it will be necessary to establish a fundamental agreement with them. The Second Vatican Council has its value. We will advance slowly and patiently.
I think Pope Francis’ remarks here on the SSPX actually quite spot-on.
In regard to Cardinal Burke’s contending that AL, or parts thereof, are not “magisterial”, I don’t understand this assertion.
AL is signed by Francis, it’s not off-the-cuff–at-30K-feet, it comes after TWO synods on this precise issue. I believe Francis never actually says it’s not magisterial at any point in the document.
If it is his ordinary magisterium, which should be treated with reverence, it’s not per se infallible.
If a document from the Pope departs from traditional teaching, perhaps it’s best to say it’s just wrong, rather than it’s not “magisterial”.
That is, say what parts depart from perennial teaching.
The interview with Bishop Bernard Fellay definitely shed some light on the enigma of Pope Francis. Pope Francis simply doesn’t believe that dogma is that important, which is why he’s open to both Bishop Bernard Fellay and Cardinal Kasper being in the same Church. What counts for Pope Francis is that one demonstrates that one cares for people. Bishop Bernard Fellay’s perspective that Pope Francis doesn’t want to silence either Bishop Bernard Fellay or Cardinal Kasper because Pope Francis sees the value of the “Hegelian dialectic” where you purposely polarize “the Thesis” (modernism) with the “anti-synthesis” (traditionalism) to come up with a new “synthesis” (whatever is floating around in Pope Francis’ head, hopefully not Latitudinarian Anglicanism).
It seems to me that a document must be granted the authority by which it was issued. ‘Amoris laetitia’ might not be technically magisterial because many of its core principles are at best heterodox, but really only a Council , this Pope, or another Pope can move a document that was a formal exercise of Pope Francis’ teaching authority from the category of “official magisterium” to “just some misguided writing that we can ignore”. ‘Amoris laetitia’ is a part of the official magiserium and it is going to show-up in every scholarly collections of the doctrines and dogmas of the Catholic Church from here until…. Because it is so long, we all know exactly which parts will make it into these collections that will be used to teach Catholic theology all all levels. So this argument of the Card, while true, doesn’t help.
The part with the SSPX strikes me as a bit overly optimistic. Pope Francis is still saying that it is necessary to come to a fundamental agreement about Vatican II. Pope Francis is particular about some doctrines especially particular interpretations of the social doctrines. He thinks that dogma gets in the way of his interpretations of the social doctrines. (Which it does. Dogma shows that this praxis is wrong.) What does the SSPX have a hangup with more: the post VII liturgy or the post VII interpretations of social doctrines?
Interesting that Bp. Fellay sounds even more optimistic about regularization than Pope Francis. Certainly they can agree that “Vatican II has its value,” since the SSPX has no objection to 95% of what the council said.