Gloria.tv
22.3K

Statement of Support for the Four Cardinals’ Dubia

As Catholic scholars and pastors of souls, we wish to express our profound gratitude and full support for the courageous initiative of four members of the College of Cardinals, Their Eminences Walter Brandmüller, Raymond Leo Burke, Carlo Caffarra and Joachim Meisner. As has been widely publicized, these cardinals have formally submitted five dubia to Pope Francis, asking him to clarify five fundamental points of Catholic doctrine and sacramental discipline, the treatment of which in Chapter 8 of the recent Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (AL) appears to conflict with Scripture and/or Tradition and the teaching of previous papal documents – notably Pope St. John Paul II’s Encyclical Veritatis Splendor and his Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio. Pope Francis has so far declined to answer the four cardinals; but since they are in effect asking him whether the above weighty magisterial documents still require our full assent, we think that the Holy Father’s continued silence may open him to the charge of negligence in the exercise of the Petrine duty of confirming his brethren in the faith.

Several prominent prelates have been sharply critical of the four cardinals’ submission, but without shedding any light on their pertinent and searching questions. We have read attempts to interpret the apostolic exhortation within a ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ by Christoph Cardinal Schӧnborn and Professor Rocco Buttiglione; but we find that they fail to demonstrate their central claim that the novel elements found in AL do not endanger divine law, but merely envisage legitimate changes in pastoral practice and ecclesiastical discipline.

Indeed, a number of commentators, notably Professor Claudio Pierantoni in an extensive new historical-theological study, have argued that as a result of the widespread confusion and disunity following the promulgation of AL, the universal Church is now entering a gravely critical moment in her history that shows alarming similarities with the great Arian crisis of the fourth century. During that catastrophic conflict the great majority of bishops, including even the Successor of Peter, vacillated over the very divinity of Christ. Many did not fully lapse into heresy; however, disarmed by confusion or weakened by timidity, they sought convenient compromise formulae in the interests of “peace” and “unity”. Today we are witnessing a similar metastasizing crisis, this time over fundamental aspects of Christian living. Continued lip service is given to the indissolubility of marriage, the grave objective sinfulness of fornication, adultery and sodomy, the sanctity of the Holy Eucharist, and the terrible reality of mortal sin. But in practice, increasing numbers of highly placed prelates and theologians are undermining or effectively denying these dogmas – and indeed, the very existence of exceptionless negative prohibitions in the divine law governing sexual conduct – by virtue of their exaggerated or one-sided emphasis on “mercy”, “pastoral accompaniment”, and “mitigating circumstances”.

With the reigning Pontiff now sounding a very uncertain trumpet in this battle against the ‘principalities and powers’ of the Enemy, the barque of Peter is drifting perilously like a ship without a rudder, and indeed, shows symptoms of incipient disintegration. In such a situation, we believe that all Successors of the Apostles have a grave and pressing duty to speak out clearly and strongly in confirmation of the moral teachings clearly expounded in the magisterial teachings of previous popes and the Council of Trent. Several bishops and another cardinal have already said they find the five dubia opportune and appropriate. We ardently hope, and fervently pray, that many more of them will now endorse publicly not only the four cardinals’ respectful request that Peter’s Successor confirm his brethren in these five points of the faith “delivered once and for all to the saints” (Jude 3), but also Cardinal Burke’s recommendation that if the Holy Father fails to do so, the cardinals then collectively approach him with some form of fraternal correction, in the spirit of Paul’s admonition to his fellow apostle Peter at Antioch (cf. Gal. 2:11).

We entrust this grave problem to the care and heavenly intercession of Mary Immaculate, Mother of the Church and Vanquisher of all heresies.
December 8, 2016, Feast of the Immaculate Conception

(Signed):

Msgr. Ignacio Barreiro Carambula, STD, JD
Chaplain and Faculty Member of the Roman Forum

Rev. Claude Barthe,
France

Dr. Robert Beddard, MA (Oxon et Cantab), D.Phil (Oxon)
Fellow emeritus and former Vice Provost of Oriel College Oxford.

Carlos A. Casanova Guerra
Doctor of Philosophy, Full Professor,
Universidad Santo Tomás, Santiago de Chile

Salvatore J. Ciresi MA
Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College
Director of the St. Jerome Biblical Guild

Luke Gormally, PhL
Director Emeritus, The Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics (1981-2000)
Sometime Research Professor, Ave Maria School of Law, Ann Arbor, Michigan (2001-2007)
Ordinary Member, The Pontifical Academy for Life

Rev. Brian W. Harrison OS, MA, STD
Associate Professor of Theology (retired), Pontifical Catholic University of Puerto Rico; Scholar-in-Residence, Oblates of Wisdom Study Center, St. Louis, Missouri

Rev. John Hunwicke, MA (Oxon.)
Former Senior Research Fellow, Pusey House, Oxford; Priest of the Ordinariate of Our Lady of Walsingham; Member, Roman Forum

Peter A. Kwasniewski PhD (Philosophy)
Professor, Wyoming Catholic College

Rev. Dr. Dr Stephen Morgan
Academies Conversion Project Leader & Oeconomus
Diocese of Portsmouth

Don Alfredo Morselli STL
Parish priest of the Archdiocese of Bologna

Rev. Richard A. Munkelt PhD (Philosophy)
Chaplain and Faculty Member, Roman Forum

Rev. John Osman MA, STL
Parish priest in the archdiocese of Birmingham,
former Catholic chaplain to the University of Cambridge

Dr Paolo Pasqualucci
Professor of Philosophy (retired),
University of Perugia

Dr Claudio Pierantoni
Professor of Medieval Philosophy in the Philosophy Faculty of the University of Chile
Former Professor of Church History and Patrology at the Faculty of Theology of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Member of the International Association of Patristic Studies

Dr John C. Rao D.Phil (Oxon.)
Associate Professor of History, St. John's University (NYC)
Chairman, Roman Forum

Dr Nicholas Richardson. MA, DPhil (Oxon.)
Fellow emeritus and Sub-Warden of Merton College, Oxford
and former Warden of Greyfriars, Oxford.

Dr Joseph Shaw MA, DPhil (Oxon.) FRSA
Senior Research Fellow (Philosophy) at St Benet's Hall,
Oxford University

Dr Anna M. Silvas FAHA,
Adjunct research fellow, University of New England,
Armidale, NSW, Australia.

Michael G. Sirilla PhD
Director of Graduate Theology,
Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio

Professor Dr Thomas Stark
Phil.-Theol. Hochschule Benedikt XVI, Heiligenkreuz

Rev. Glen Tattersall
Parish Priest, Parish of Bl. John Henry Newman, Archdiocese of Melbourne
Rector, St Aloysius' Church, Melbourne

Rev. Dr David Watt STL, PhD (Cantab.)
Priest of the Archdiocese of Perth
Chaplain, St Philomena’s chapel, Malaga
Lionel L. Andrades
DECEMBER 10, 2016
Scholars supporting four cardinals in major philosophical mistake
The 23 Scholars who have signed a Statement in support of the four cardinals and the Dubbia like the present magisterium have made a major philosophical mistake.They include Dr.Joseph Shaw a professor of philosophy.
Like the four cardinals the Catholic scholars have overlooked an error which would be obvious to a …
More
DECEMBER 10, 2016

Scholars supporting four cardinals in major philosophical mistake

The 23 Scholars who have signed a Statement in support of the four cardinals and the Dubbia like the present magisterium have made a major philosophical mistake.They include Dr.Joseph Shaw a professor of philosophy.

Like the four cardinals the Catholic scholars have overlooked an error which would be obvious to a school boy or a non Catholic who is not educated.

As I mentioned in a previous blog post the following four errors are made by the present magisterium.
They are also made by the four cardinals and the 23 scholars who support them.
1.From the philosophical point of view a catechumen who desires to receive the baptism of water but dies before he can receive it, is a hypothetical case for us?
My answer is YES.It is a hypothetical case.
The scholars and the cardinals infer that it is not a hypothetical case, for them.It is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This was the theological position of the Letter of the Holy Office 194 9 which they allsupport. The error of the Letter was based on this philosophical reasoning.
2.So if someone says that this case of the catechumen is physically visible in 2016 and personally known to us then this would be false reasoning.? My answer is YES.

The cardinals and scholars over looked Vatican Council II(AG 7 and LG 14) making this same error.Vatican Council II mentions the case of the catechumen and places it along with orthodox text which says all need faith and baptism for salvation, the Church is necessary for salvation.

3.Would it violate the Principle of Non Contrradiction if someone said this case was visible in the present times, and was personally known?
My answer Yes.
So we have cardinals and scholars violating the Principle of Non Contradiction.Then they act as if all is normal.
The violate the Principle of Non Contradiction when they assume someone invisible is visible.They infer that someone who does not exist on earth actually exists and is known.Someone who is not concrete and tangible it is assumed to be defacto and real in present time and space and is an example of salvation without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.

4.Similarly this case of a catechumen in the past too would be hypothetical for the people of that time, since it cannot be physically visible and known in personal cases?
My answer is YES.

Yet some of the traditionalists assume that there is a St. Emerentiana in Heaven with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water.This is as if someone saw her physically in Heaven.Or it is as if the Church has made an official pronouncement that she went to Heaven without the baptism of water.It is made to appear that this was personally known to someone in the Catholic Church and so this announcement was made.

TWO QUESTIONS TRADITIONALISTS,SEDEVACANTISTS DO NOT ANSWER

1) Do we personally know the dead now saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc,can we see them, are they physically visible to us in 2016 ?
My answer is that they we cannot see them. They are not physically visible and personally known in our time and space.

The cardinals, including the four mentioned here, will not answer or broach this question.

2) Since we do not know any of these cases, in real life, they are not visible for us, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or Ad Gentes 7 which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation? My answer is that they are not exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus . They were never exceptions in the first place. Rome made a mistake in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
However the new theology of the four cardinals and the 23 scholars is based upon this error and they do not want to talk about it or admit it.
-Lionel Andrades

__________________________________________

DECEMBER 10, 2016

The present magisterium has made a major philosophical mistake
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/the-present-mag…

DECEMBER 10, 2016

The source of the present Arian-like heresy throughout the Church is a philosophy which interprets invisible persons as being visible and so a non traditional conclusion is created
eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/…/the-source-of-p…
Holy Cannoli