VIDEO: Card. Burke about the future of the Five Dubia about ‘Amoris laetitia’

At St. Raymond of Penafort Church in Virginia (which if I am not mistaken was built by my my friend Fr. James Gould), another Raymond, Card. Burke, answered a question about the Five Dubia submitted by the Four Cardinals about the infamous objectively murky bits of Amoris laetitia.

The Dubia That Won’t Die.

So far, Pope Francis has not given any clear answer to the Five Dubia, though surrogates (e.g., Card. Schoenborn, Card. Coccopalmerio, et al.) have thrown up smoke screens and misdirections which we were supposed to accept as adequate explanations of the objectively murky bits.  Others have flat out denied that there are any obscurities or ambiguities, which is, of course, absurd.

Yesterday, Card. Burke responded to a question about what might happen if the Holy Father does not provide responses to the Dubia.  There is a video.

The question was, what would the Four Cardinals do if the Pope does not respond to the dubia.

The Cardinal answers that they would have to correct the situation in a manner that draws from the constant teaching of the Church on the issues raised by the dubia, and that this teaching would be made known for the good of souls.

In other words, the Cardinals would issue a public restatement of the constant teaching of the Church in regard to the issues covered by the Five Dubia.  Does this mean all four of the Four Cardinals? Cardinal Burke did not say, at least in the video clip, above.


About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Joe in Canada says:

    Yes, a simple yes-no answer to each question, consistent with the teaching of the Church, and then a line thanking the Holy Father for clearing things up for us.

  2. Fr. Kelly says:

    Joe in Canada is onto something.
    Perhaps it could go something like this:

    As to the First, Negative.
    As to the Second, Affirmative.
    As to the Third, Affirmative.
    As to the Fourth, Affirmative.
    As to the Fifth, Affirmative.
    We wish to express our humble gratitude to his Holiness Pope Francis for removing all causes for confusion in this matter and for reaffirming the unchangeable character of Divine Law.


    This would give his holiness the opportunity to take as his own this clarification and reaffirm what must be reaffirmed. Deus lo vult.

  3. Cornelius says:

    Honestly, a restatement of the Church’s teaching on the Dubia matters won’t change a thing. We all know the orthodox answers to the Dubia.

    The problem is that many Catholics put loyalty to the person of the Pope above loyalty to the Truth – so that whatever the Pope says, no matter how contrary to the Church’s teachings, must be adhered to. Papal positivism, or papolatry as it is sometimes called.

    Also, Francis tells people what they want to hear. People don’t want to be held to Christian teaching, especially in matters of sexual ethics. They want an “out”, and Francis gives it to them.

    A “formal correction”, i.e., restatement of the truth, will not change those attitudes at all. Catholics that already embrace the truth and try to live it will continue to do so. Those that don’t, won’t. The chaos instigated by Francis will continue until God ends this pontificate.

  4. frjim4321 says:

    Nice ambo. I would have liked to have seen more of the church.

    From the quality of that work I would hope they have a pipe organ and not an electronic appliance.

  5. Papabile says:

    I was in this Parish when it still met in a Fire Hall. Father Gould at that time called it the Holy Fire Hall. :-)

    He built the parish in cruciform, in a very traditional way. It’s beautiful.

  6. philosophicallyfrank says:

    I’m probably wrong; but, wasn’t “Amoris Laetitia” supposedly, at least in part, infallible? [Only in those matters which the Church clearly teaches as such.] Again, I’m probably wrong; but, didn’t Pope Francis seem to infer that it was? [Inference isn’t a very good guide when it comes to matters of infallibility. Clarity is needed so that there are no doubts.] The seemingly reluctance of the Pope to respond to the Cardinals and they’re taking the action that they took implies great importance to the document. [I think it implies the opposite. That it isn’t as important as some think.] I realize the dangerous implication of my questions; which is why I am asking them. He has said that he accepts everything that the Church teaches and yet he so often seems to suggest otherwise. It is a very scary scenario. [Yes.]

Comments are closed.