BOMBSHELL: CARDINAL MUELLER COULD NOT BE ANY CLEARER IN ANSWERING THE DUBIA, BUT IT IS IN AN INTERVIEW AND ONE WONDERS IF CARDINAL MULLER HAS POPE FRANCIS' BLESSING IN TEACHING CATHOLIC DOCTRINE SO CLEARLY!

If the Holy Father wanted Cardinal Mueller to answer the pope's critics and answer the dubia, this isn't the way to do it but it is better than nothing as Cardinal Mueller is crystal clear, a clarity often lacking in Pope Francis remarks and writings. So it is good. But if the good Cardinal is acting independently of the pope in saying this, it is a dead-in OR THE BEGINNING OF A CARDINALS' REBUKE OF A POPE?

This is from Sandro Magister, that great Italian commentator who once wrote for his blog Chiesa but now has in on  L'Espresso. Read it here and book mark it.

Settimo Cielo di Sandro Magister, L'Espresso

01 feb

The Pope Is Silent, But Cardinal Müller Speaks. Who Responds To the "Dubia" This Way

To him too, in addition to Pope Francis, cardinals Brandmüller, Burke, Caffarra, and Meisner had sent their five “dubia” on the interpretation of “Amoris Laetitia,” seeking “clarity.”

And neither he, Cardinal Gerhard L. Müller, prefect of the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, nor much less the pope had responded until now to the questions of the four cardinals.

To make up for this, however, now Müller is bringing clarity in an extensive interview that is coming out today in the magazine “Il Timone,” conducted by editor Riccardo Cascioli and by Lorenzo Bertocchi:

 La verità non si negozia

In the interview, the cardinal does not use the word “dubia,” but he says “apertis verbis” precisely what the four cardinals were asking to have clarified.

And he does not fail to lash out against those bishops who with their interpretive “sophistries” - he says - instead of acting as leaders for their faithful are falling “into the risk of the blind leading the blind.”

Here are the key passages of the interview.

*

Q: Can there be a contradiction between doctrine and personal conscience?

A: No, that is impossible. For example, it cannot be said that there are circumstances according to which an act of adultery does not constitute a mortal sin. For Catholic doctrine, it is impossible for mortal sin to coexist with sanctifying grace. In order to overcome this absurd contradiction, Christ has instituted for the faithful the Sacrament of penance and reconciliation with God and with the Church.

Q: This is a question that is being extensively discussed with regard to the debate surrounding the post-synodal exhortation “Amoris Laetitia.”

A: “Amoris Laetitia” must clearly be interpreted in the light of the whole doctrine of the Church. [...] I don’t like it, it is not right that so many bishops are interpreting “Amoris Laetitia” according to their way of understanding the pope’s teaching. This does not keep to the line of Catholic doctrine. The magisterium of the pope is interpreted only by him or through the congregation for the doctrine of the faith. The pope interprets the bishops, it is not the bishops who interpret the pope, this would constitute an inversion of the structure of the Catholic Church. To all these who are talking too much, I urge them to study first the doctrine [of the councils] on the papacy and the episcopate. The bishop, as teacher of the Word, must himself be the first to be well-formed so as not to fall into the risk of the blind leading the blind. [...]

Q: The exhortation of Saint John Paul II, “Familiaris Consortio,” stipulates that divorced and remarried couples that cannot separate, in order to receive the sacraments must commit to live in continence. Is this requirement still valid?

A: Of course, it is not dispensable, because it is not only a positive law of John Paul II, but he expressed an essential element of Christian moral theology and the theology of the sacraments. The confusion on this point also concerns the failure to accept the encyclical “Veritatis Splendor,” with the clear doctrine of the “intrinsece malum.” [...] For us marriage is the expression of participation in the unity between Christ the bridegroom and the Church his bride. This is not, as some said during the Synod, a simple vague analogy. No! This is the substance of the sacrament, and no power in heaven or on earth, neither an angel, nor the pope, nor a council, nor a law of the bishops, has the faculty to change it.

Q: How can one resolve the chaos that is being generated on account of the different interpretations that are given of this passage of Amoris Laetitia?

A: I urge everyone to reflect, studying the doctrine of the Church first, starting from the Word of God in Sacred Scripture, which is very clear on marriage. I would also advise not entering into any casuistry that can easily generate misunderstandings, above all that according to which if love dies, then the marriage bond is dead. (I wrote about this in my post below! Do you think the good Cardinal read it??? YIKES!)These are sophistries: the Word of God is very clear and the Church does not accept the secularization of marriage. The task of priests and bishops is not that of creating confusion, but of bringing clarity. One cannot refer only to little passages present in “Amoris Laetitia,” but it has to be read as a whole, with the purpose of making the Gospel of marriage and the family more attractive for persons. It is not “Amoris Laetitia” that has provoked a confused interpretation, but some confused interpreters of it. All of us must understand and accept the doctrine of Christ and of his Church, and at the same time be ready to help others to understand it and put it into practice even in difficult situations.

*

So comments Cardinal Müller, who among the "confused interpreters" of "Amoris Laetitia" cannot help but have included the Argentine bishops of the region of Buenos Aires.

To whom, however, Pope Francis wrote expressing his complete approval: "El escrito es muy bueno y explícita cabalmente el sentido del capítulo VIII de 'Amoris laetitia'. No hay otras interpretaciones."…

(English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.)