If you read the LifeSite account, you have the impression that Card. Burke may be going for the “formal correction” option. HERE
They seemed to have based their piece on Part 2 of an interview with His Eminence which The Wanderer posted. HERE
What does The Wanderer really say?
Q. [NB]Setting aside the question of timing, please explain how the process for the execution of a “formal correction” would proceed should a response to the five dubia not be forthcoming? How is a formal correction officially submitted, how is it addressed within the Church’s hierarchal structure, etc.?
BURKE: The process has not been frequently invoked in the Church, and not now for several centuries. There has been the correction of past Holy Fathers on significant points, but not in a doctrinal way. It seems to me that the essence of the correction is quite simple. 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 hasn’t said that something is going to be done.]
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.
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. [He still hasn’t said anything that indicates that he will undertake a special process.] 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 direct itself principally to those doctrinal points. [“would” not “will”]
There have been cases, as I mentioned, of the correction of past Roman Pontiffs on non-doctrinal points where cardinals have gone to the Holy Father on one thing or the other such as, for example, matters dealing with administration of the Church.
Another question can also be raised. The Pope is the principle of unity of the bishops and all the faithful. However, the Church is being torn asunder right now by confusion and division. The Holy Father must be called on to exercise his office to put an end to this.
So then, the next step would be a formal declaration stating the clear teachings of the Church as set forth in the dubia. Furthermore, it would be stated that these truths of the Faith are not being clearly set forth by the Roman Pontiff. In other words, instead of asking the questions as was done in the dubia, the formal correction would be stating the answers as clearly taught by the Church.
So, the Cardinal describes what we pretty much know already. He speaks in vague terms about what “would be” done.
It seems to me that we shouldn’t jump to any conclusions about this. I don’t have the sense that something is about to take place any day now.
Meanwhile, do you know what you could do to help the overall situation?
We can resist cloudy, hazy, vague claims by those who want to undermine the Church’s perennial teachings. Ask questions… well-informed questions.
Form small groups – little “base communities” – and start reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church together, and perhaps other documents such as Familiaris consortio and Veritatis splendor.
The moderation queue is ON.