This man is an enemy. He contributes to the mental chaos of Catholics. If the "highest Church authorities" (read: the man occupying St. Peter's Chair and his Curia) have abandoned Christ, then they cannot be any longer "Church authorities." What in Sam Hill is so damnably difficult to understand? +Burke is a prevaricating prelate who, for most of his priesthood and episcopacy, has been a part of the Conciliar Revolt.

@Simon-
A psychological impediment is erected when one is confronted with facts which seem at first to threaten one’s faith, as is the case with many souls who are unable to reconcile the magnitude of the present crisis and all its consequences and implications, with somewhat inaccurate notions concerning infallibility and indefectibility, which, precisely because they are inaccurate, threaten the faith of such souls. The result is hostility and crimethink, as a measure of protective stupidity.
The primary cause of these errors, is rashly pontificating about just how far our Lord could/would go in trying/testing/chastising His Church, declaring the present situation exceeds these subjectively imposed limits (thereby allegedly destroying indefectibility, apostolicity, etc), and arriving at absurd conclusions.
The solution, of course, is exactly the opposite: Accept that we do not know how far the Church can be tested and/or obscured (eg., during the Great Western Schism, there was no recognizable head of the Chur h for 40 years, with the overwhelming majority of the hierarchy siding with one who was later declared an antipope, yet evidently this historical fact did not impugn the Church’s visibility). And had such a sorry state not have actually transpired, today people would say that such a thing could not happen, just as today they say it is impossible that we could have several consecutive antipopes: “It’s against Vatican I’s teaching on perpetual successors!” But if one thinks carefully, an interregnum is not an interruption, and having public heretics as popes (were such a thing possible) is significantly worse than having no popes at all for a while.
For any interested, the WMReview has an interesting article on this very subject right now.
Classic study admits invalid rites would NOT destroy hierarchy

From the article cited:
“ In The Relations of the Church to Society: Theological Essays, O’Reilly discussed the Great Western Schism, and warned against the incautious assumption of what evils God may or may not permit to affect the Church:
“The great schism of the West suggests to me a reflection which I take the liberty of expressing here. If this schism had not occurred, the hypothesis of such a thing happening would appear to many chimerical. They would say it could not be; God would not permit the Church to come into so unhappy a situation. Heresies might spring up and spread and last painfully long, through the fault and to the perdition of their authors and abettors, to the great distress too of the faithful, increased by actual persecution in many places where the heretics were dominant. But that the true Church should remain between thirty and forty years without a thoroughly ascertained Head, and representative of Christ on earth, this would not be.
“Yet it has been; and we have no guarantee that it will not be again, though we may fervently hope otherwise. What I would infer is, that we must not be too ready to pronounce on what God may permit. We know with absolute certainty that He will fulfil His promises; not allow anything to occur at variance with them; that He will sustain His Church and enable her to triumph over all enemies and difficulties; that He will give to each of the faithful those graces which are needed for each one’s service of Him and attainment of salvation, as He did during the great schism we have been considering, and in all the sufferings and trials which the Church has passed through from the beginning.
“We may also trust He will do a great deal more than what He has bound Himself to by His promises. We may look forward with a cheering probability to exemption for the future from some of the troubles and misfortunes that have befallen in the past. But we, or our successors in future generations of Christians, shall perhaps see stranger evils than have yet been experienced, even before the immediate approach of that great winding up of all things on earth that will precede the day of judgment. I am not setting up for a prophet, nor pretending to see unhappy wonders, of which I have no knowledge whatever.
“All I mean to convey is that contingencies regarding the Church, not excluded by the Divine promises, cannot be regarded as practically impossible, just because they would be terrible and distressing in a very high degree.”6

@SeanJohnson: I'm glad you found WM Review. It's probably the best site on the net that addresses the present crisis academically - with the intellect and not the emotions.

If you want to be sure go to the SSPX!

@Irishpol: Denounce them? He luxuriated in them pre-Francis.

Cardinal Burke it is clearly time for you to examine all the laws of the Church relating to the validity/invalidity of, by far the most destructive, and the chief apostate, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, and to thereby establish that it is impossible for him to be validly the Pope.
Since when did you come to believe that an apostate could be a Pope? Since Jorge took (stole) the Chair of Peter??? I am not saying you do believe that....but I cannot get my head around where you stand on the matter of Bergoglio's legitimacy.
Can you please explain to us what you understand in relation to this matter????

I signed the Correction and the Cardinal said that he and the other Cardinals would pursue their correction regarding Francis! Since then silence!

@Tony M: Well done, Tony!