Jorge Mario Bergoglio breaking the rules back in 2002

According to Juan Pablo Escobar Henao (aka Sebastián Marroquín), the son of Colombian drug lord and narcoterrorist Pablo Emilio Escobar Gaviria, his mother arranged for his fiancé (María Ángeles Sarmiento) and he to marry in a Catholic ceremony outside a Catholic church even though church law in Argentina forbid it. The facilitator who mad it happen was none other than the bishop of Buenos Aires — Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

source: Pablo Escobar: My Father by Juan Pablo Escobar, ebook (2016), p. 349.

The archbishop of Medellin, Alberto Giraldo Jaramillo, in 2014 said,

“In view of strange irregularities that have arisen due to the invalid celebration of weddings in hotels, banquet halls, social salons, farms, and other places rather than parish churches, I have considered it appropriate to remind you that such marriages would in and of themselves be NULL.”

This is also stated in a church circular on marriage the Catholic church in Colombia has published,

“THE PRIESTS CAN NOT CELEBRATE MARRIAGES IN HOTELS, RECEPTION HOUSES, SOCIAL HALLS OR FARMS AND THEN REGISTER THEM IN THEIR PARISHES. THEY WILL BE NULL MARRIAGES.”

Of course Jorge Mario Bergoglio has no problem bending and breaking rules as well as laws.  After all one of the greatest sins to him it to be too rigid.  Then you also have to consider the fact that he believes “the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null.”

Juan Pablo Escobar Henao explains...

sources for story:

• gloria.tv, "The favor of Card. Bergoglio to the widow of Escobar"

• Laicos Unidos en Cristo, En Argentina Bergoglio autorizó una boda fuera de la Iglesia al hijo del narco terrorista Escobar, que están prohibidas

strange favors of the peripheries

The mother and the bishop — Maria Victoria Henao and Jorge Mario Bergoglio

What’s going on at the FSSPX?

(click images to enlarge)

A Novus Ordo diocesan priest oversees the exchange of vows 

while the SSPX priest stands to the side and watches.

“Thus, we find ourselves in a case of necessity.... This is why we are convinced that, by the act of these consecrations today, we are obeying... the call of God.” — Abp. Marcel Lefebvre in sermon given at  the episcopal consecrations of June 30, 1988.

Quoted in Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican, 2nd ed., Fr. Francois Laisney, (Kansas City: Angelus Press, 1999), pp. 118-19.

Last month on February 10, 2018, a couple from the FSSPX community of St. Raphael’s in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada were wed by a Novus Ordo priest, Fr. Kelly Wilson.  This wedding didn’t take place at St. Raphael’s, instead it happened in Fr. Wilson’s diocesan church of St. Augustine of Canterbury in Brandon, Manitoba, Canada.  After the exchange of vows, Fr. Richard Vachon, who had witnessed all this go down, proceeded to offer a nuptial mass (Tridentine Mass — 1962) in the Novus Ordo St. Augustine’s.  According to the Remnant Newspaper,

“The couple preferred the church of St. Augustine for the ceremony, and Fr. Vachon reportedly indicated to them that since it is the couple who are the ministers of the sacrament of marriage, it doesn’t matter which priest officiated.”  

This leads to all sorts of questions.  First off, is Fr. Kelly Wilson a valid priest?  If so, is the Novus Ordo Missae valid?  If so, since communion is given in the hand and particles of the host fall on the ground, did not — the bride, groom, bridesmaids, groomsmen, priests, and guests — all those present walk on Christ?

What if the bride and groom tire of each other and decide to get an annulment?  Will they go to the diocese where annulments are given out for fogging a mirror?  Or will they go to the SSPX which claims a right they do not have under a “state of necessity” to grant annulments?

The answer to all these questions is dependent on whom in the SSPX you ask them to and how well the talks with Modernist Rome are going at the moment.  Sometimes they say, ‘yes, it’s doubtful’ other times, ‘no, it’s valid’.  None of this should be surprising as the FSSPX runs hot and cold.  Perhaps, Bp. Bernard Fellay can clarify as to what SSPX’s policy is regarding marriage and their agreement with Modernist Rome?

“[It’s] not a trap, not a bad, hidden trick”

(From 1 minute 12 seconds to 16 minutes 40 seconds; Bp. Fellay speaks on marriage and the Vatican granting them the privilege to perform weddings provided they meet certain conditions; Letter can be read by clicking here.)

St. Raphael’s Priory of the SSPX in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada was so proud of the Novus Ordoized - Extraordinary Form wedding that they published a photo of the married couple standing beside the Novus Ordo presider and SSPX priest (see below) in their bulletin of March 2018.

If the SSPX is now going to have their priests witness marriages in Novus Ordo churches that have a Novus Ordo presider as the main witness, then have their priest offer up the ‘Extraordinary Form’ for the couple in the same Novus Ordo church, what’s the point and where is the “state of necessity”?

Is the Society bringing the Faith back to Modernist Rome and its Novus Ordo Missae or is the Society becoming that which it so strongly protested for years?

It’s interesting times to be living in.

Hey if the Vatican can have two popes, why not have two priests for a wedding?


***** UPDATED 4 APRIL 2018 *****

The above mentioned groom writes an open letter concerning his wedding and the SSPX—Canada posts it on their official website.

Ottawa, ON

March 26th 2018

A clarification on my wedding

Greetings.

I, Nicolas Lessard, got married to Monica Green on the 10th of February 2018, in the Roman Catholic Church of Saint Augustine of Canterbury in Brandon, Manitoba. Both my wife and I are faithful of the Society of Saint Pius X. The host priest, Father Kelly received our vows, and Father Vachon, of the SSPX celebrated our wedding mass. Following the wedding, there has been a lot of buzz about the circumstances of the wedding in the context of the relationship between Rome and the Society. This letter intends to address this “controversy”.

The first point I would like to make is that the controversy started off with the SSPX's Winnipeg bulletin showing a picture of my wife and me, Father Vachon of the SSPX, who prepared our marriage, and Father Kelly. The bulletin didn’t give many details and the articles that spawned from it implied or assumed many things that were false. Normally, someone who doesn’t know all the aspects of an issue should give the benefit of the doubt, in all Christian charity. The fact that some bloggers did not do so indicates to me that they are spinning a story to drive an ideological narrative, which is disingenuous and dishonest.

The second point addresses the location of the marriage. The location was not imposed on us by the diocese or the SSPX but was freely chosen by Monica (from SK) and myself (from QC). The SSPX priests here do not have the necessary civil license to perform marriages in Saskatchewan (SK) since they do not reside there, which complicated the location selection. We found this church, which presented all the qualities we were looking for which many churches, including both the SSPX churches in Welwyn (SK) and Winnipeg (MB), lacked. These include seating capacity, whether the church was heated (we’re in Canada here!), distance to the reception hall, cost, transports, and the dignity of the church. This last point is worth mentioning since all attendees noticed the sheer beauty of St. Augustine of Canterbury. There was an appreciation for the beautiful harmony of the Traditional liturgy, the Gregorian singing and the church’s well preserved gothic interior. 

The third point regards the laws of the Church. Monica and I consider ourselves not just faithful of the SSPX, but faithful Roman Catholics. In spite of the cancerous crisis going on in the Church, she stays the One True Church of God, and thus the errors of her representatives do not negate the obligation to follow legitimate requests. Neither of us were willing to weaken our marriage bonds by operating outside proper regulations.

We would have had Father Vachon receive our marriage vows if it had been up to us. But since, we were in a church of the diocese, we followed the directives given to the Society by Rome concerning the Society’s marriages. We understand that the Society has followed this same procedure for many individual cases long before these directives were published anyway; actual SSPX parishioners will know that. 

I hope this letter answers most of the questions that were raised from this one picture and label in a parish bulletin. Although it is unfortunate that our marriage was used by some online to promote baseless speculation, my wife and I will take this occasion to ask those who read this to pray for us and for the SSPX! 

Nicolas Lessard

‘Open Letter Lessard—Green SSPX Wedding’, A clarification on my wedding, SSPX—Canada, (26 March 2018)

Francis caps off his ‘Deforestation of Hope’ Tour with in-flight entertainment

In-flight interview from Lima to Rome

Greg Burke: Holy Father, thank you after a long and intense journey, at times warm, where you touched people's hearts, the holy people faithful to God, with a message of peace and hope, but also faced the challenges of the Church in Chile, the Church in Peru and also the two societies, with a special intention for the human dignity of the indigenous peoples and for the Amazon. Thank you for the opportunity to follow it closely and now let’s try to delve a bit further into the themes of the trip. 

Francis: Good evening and thanks for your work. It was a trip... I don’t know how you say in Italian, but in Spanish you say “pasteurized,” as you do with milk. You don’t pass from cold to hot, from hot to cold. And we passed from the south of Chile, a fresh, beautiful landscape, to the desert, the forests of Maldonado, then to Trujillo, the sea, and then to Lima. All the temperatures and all the climes. And this is tiring. Thanks so much! Now, the questions.

Greg Burke: Yes. We have questions from Peru and Chile to start. Armando Canchanya.

Francis: Let’s start with those about the trip, all of them, and when we finish, if something is missing about the trip, I’ll tell you, and then the other questions if there are any.

Greg Burke: Perfect! Armando Canchanya of RPP, Perù

Armando Canchanya (RPP, Perù): Thanks for letting us accompany you. You went through three cities. I wanted to ask you about this trip. What does the Holy Father take with him from the trip to Peru?

Francis: I take the impression of a believing people who have had many difficulties and they had them historically. But they have a faith that impresses me, not only the faith in Trujillo, where popular piety is very rich and very strong, but also the faith on the streets, and not only in Lima where evidently you see it, but also in Trujillo, also in Puerto Maldonado, where I thought to have an event in a place like this one, but it was a full square and when left for another, the streets as well. It’s a people who went out to express their joy and their faith.

It is true that you have, as it says today at noon, a saintly land. They are the Latin American people who have more saints, and high-level saints. Toribio, Rosa, Martin, Juan. High level. I believe that faith has run deep, very deep ... I take from Peru an impression of joy, of faith, of hope, of [a people] walking again, and above all, many children. I returned to that image that I saw in the Philippines and Colombia, the dads and the moms along my route raising up their kids, and that says “future.” It says “hope,” because nobody brings a child into the world if they do not have hope.

The only thing I ask is that they take care of their wealth, not only that of the churches and the museums — that the works of art are great — and not only of the suffering, that have enriched them so much, but the riches that I have seen in these days.

Greg Burke: Thank you Holy Father! Now Giovanni Hinojosa from the Republic of Peru

Giovanni Hinojosa: The political class has defrauded the people with acts of corruption and negotiated pardons, but so have members of the Church, like the...

Francis: The problem of corruption...I wouldn't know how to respond to you historically, the progress of corruption of other countries in the world, you know that some countries in Europe there is a lot of corruption...some, not all. Yes in Latin (America) there are a lot of spotlights of corruption. Today this way of speaking about Odebrecht, for example. But this is a sample. The origin of corruption is...I would say that it is original sin which then carried...I wrote a booklet one time, very small, called "Sin and Corruption" and the motto I use is sinner yes, corrupt no. All of us are sinners, but I think that all of us here, at least I admit it on my part, treat a friend badly, steal, do drugs, or try not to...God's forgiveness is above all of this. I am not afraid of sin, I am afraid of corruption, because corruption impairs the body and the soul. And a corrupt person is so sure of themselves that they cannot go back. They are like those swamps that you try to get out of and they suck you [back]. It's a swamp. Yes, it's the destruction of the human person.

I don’t know if you want to ask something more about corruption. After I pass to the Sodalitium, no? Of course, the politician has a lot of power. The businessmen also has a lot of power. The businessmen who pays half of his workers is corrupt. And a housewife who is accustomed and believes that it is normal to exploit the maids either with salary or with the way she treats them, is corrupt. I remember a conversation I had with someone, a professional, young, 30 years old, who told me that he was carrying the thing, young, he was 30 years old. And he told me that he treated his domestic staff in a non-noble way. I told him, but you cannot do this, this is a sin. Father, he told me, we are not going to buy these people with me, these people are here for that. And this is what the sex trafficker thinks, the slave labor handler, they are corrupt.

And is there corruption in the Church? Yes, there are instances of corruption in the Church. This has always been so. Men and women of the Church have engaged in the game of corruption. And that serves as a bridge for the Sodalitium.

The situation of the Sodalitium began with the case of a person who appeared very virtuous, who died, and investigating his life, it was discovered that he had led a double life (Editor’s Note: he is referring to the case of German Doig Klinge, who died Feb. 13, 2001). This is the first chaos of the Sodalitium that I know of, but that happened in the past, twenty or twenty five years ago. And after that, there was an allegation of abuse, not only sexual, but of manipulation of the conscience by the founder. The case of the founder went to the Holy See, he was sentenced, he was not expelled from the Sodalitium, but he lives alone. One person attends to him. He declares himself to be innocent of the evidence of the case and has appealed to the Apostolic Signature, which is the supreme court of justice at the Vatican. According to the information I have, the appeal will be released in less than a month. It has been a year. But what has happened now? That trial was the trigger for other victims of this person to make civil and ecclesial claims. If the Apostolic Signatura decides in favor of the appeal, it will not make sense, because many, many serious cases are accumulating. Civil justice has intervened and, in this chaos, that is necessary, it is a matter of justice. I am not very informed, but the thing is very unfavorable for the founder.

On the other hand, this was not only a personal situation, there were things that weren't clear. Almost two years ago, I named a visitator in the person of Cardinal Tobin of Newark. Since the visit, he has discovered things that he doesn't understand and that aren't clear, and I named two economic viewers. And this is the third abuse, which also went up to the founder. And after a study, he recommended a custodian for the Sodalitium. Four weeks ago I sent the letter, and two weeks ago I named [him]. Concerning the procedures, it is a similar case to that of the Legionaries, which was carried out by Benedict XVI. In this, he was very strong. He didn't tolerate these things, and from him I’ve understood not to tolerate them as well. The legal status is [that they are] under a custodian, and the apostolic visit continues.

Greg Burke: Now, we’re passing on to Chile, with Juan Pablo Iglesias of La Tercera.

Juan Pablo Iglesias (La Tercera): At first, your message was very strong about [clerical sexual] abuse, but the last day [in Chile] you made a statement [saying some victims] are committing slander. Why do you believe Barros more than the victims?

Francis: I understand the question perfectly. On [Bishop] Barros, I only made one declaration. I spoke in Chile, and this was in Iquique, at the end. I spoke two times about the abuse, with a lot of strength, in front of the government, which was to speak in front of the country, and in the cathedral with the priests.

What I said to the priests is what I feel most deeply about this case. You know that Benedict XVI began by taking a zero tolerance [approach], and I have continued with zero tolerance. After almost 5 years of being Pope, I have not signed any "permission of pardon.” In the cases of dismissal from the clerical state, it's a definitive sentence in first instance. The person condemned has the right to appeal to the tribunal of the second instance. The tribunal knows that if there is clear proof of abuse, they cannot appeal the sentence. What can be appealed are the procedures: lack of procedures, irregularities, then there you have to make a review of the process. If the second instance confirms the first, there’s only one exit left for the person and that is appealing to the Pope, as a grace.

In five years, I have received — I don’t know the number — 20 or 25 requests for “grace” that have come in. I didn’t sign any. Only in one case, which wasn’t grace but the argument of a juridical sentence, in the first year of the pontificate.

I found myself with two sentences, one very serious from the diocese, and one from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which was the strongest. The one from the diocese was very serious and very conditioned… with these conditions, one needs to wait a time to see that… that is, the case wasn’t closed. (Editor note: The comments appear to refer to the case of Italian Mauro Inzoli)

As must be done with good jurisprudence, always in favor of the accused. I opted for the most lenient sentence, with the conditions.

After two years, it was decided that the conditions weren’t completed and so I let the other work. It was the only case in which I hesitated because there were two sentences and there was a juridical principle “in dubia pro reo” and so for this I opted for that. That is my position.

In the case of Bishop Barros, I had it studied, I had it investigated, I had it worked on a lot. And truly there is no evidence. I use the word evidence. Then I will speak about proof. There is no evidence of culpability, it seems that it will not be found. There is a coherence in another sense. I am waiting for evidence to change position, but I apply the judicial principle basic in any tribunal: “nemo malus nisi provetur” — no one is guilty until it is proven.

I used the word "proof" and I believe that gave me a hard time. I said it in Spanish, as I remember, I was entering and a journalist from Iquique asked me: ‘In Chile we have a big problem with Bishop Barros, what do you think?' I think that the words I said were these. First I thought about whether to respond or not, and I said yes [I would], because he had been bishop of Iquique, and a parishioner is asking me. I said, the day that I have proof I will speak. I think I said, ‘I don’t have proof,’ but it is recorded, you can find it.

The answer was: the day that I have proof, I will speak. The word 'proof' is what caused [concern]. No one is bad “sino probetur.” I would speak about evidence and, of course, I know that there are a lot of people who have been abused and that they cannot show proof, they do not have it. They cannot [show it] or sometimes they have it, but they are ashamed and hide it, and suffer in silence. The drama of those who have been abused is tremendous. Terrible. Two [months] ago I tended to a woman who was abused 40 years ago — 40, married with three children. This woman hadn’t received Communion from that time, because in the hand of the priest she saw the hand of the abuser. She couldn't go near. And she was a believer. She was Catholic. Sorry to continue in Spanish, but I want to be precise with the Chileans. The word “proof” wasn’t the best [word to use] in order to be near to a sorrowful heart. I would say evidence.

The case of Barros was studied, it was re-studied, and there is no evidence. That is what I wanted to say. I have no evidence to condemn. And if I were to condemn without evidence or without moral certainty, I would commit the crime of a bad judge.

I have another thing to say… I’ll explain it in Italian.

One of you came up to me and said: have you seen the letter that came out? They showed me a letter that I had written years ago when the problem with Barros began. I need to explain that letter, because it is also a letter in favor of prudence, how the problem with Barros was managed. That letter does not tell of a momentary fact; that letter is the narration of more or less 10-12 months. When the scandal with Karadima was discovered, we all know this scandal, we began to see many priests who were formed by Karadima who were either abused or who were abusers. In Chile there are four bishops who Karadima invited to the seminary. Someone from the episcopal conference made a suggestion that it would be better perhaps if these four bishops renounced their positions, resigned, took a sabbatical year while the storm passed, to avoid accusations, because they are good bishops.

And Barros, Barros already had been bishop there for 20 years and was about to finish his military bishopric. He was an auxiliary, then bishop of Iquique and then military bishop for almost 10 years, and 20 years a bishop. But let us ask if the accusations against him, perhaps explaining them...and he diligently resigned. And he came to Rome and I told him: ‘No, we don't play this way, because this is to admit culpability in advance, and then, as in any case, if there are culpable parties, it will be investigated.’ And I rejected it. This is about the 10 months contained in that letter. Then, when he was appointed and all this protest took place, he gave me his resignation for the second time. I said, ‘No, you go.’ I spoke with him for a long time, others spoke at length with him… you go. You know what happened there the day he took possession, the protests. They continued to investigate Barros, but there is no evidence and this is what I wanted to say: I cannot condemn him because I don't have the evidence and this is what I wanted to say. I cannot condemn him because I do not have the evidence. But I am also convinced that he is innocent.

I will pass to a third point, that of the letter I explained clearly: what those who have been abused feel. With this I have to ask forgiveness because the word "proof" wounded, it wounded many people who were abused, but I must go to look for the certificate, I have to do that — a word on translation, in the legal jargon, I wounded them. I ask them for forgiveness because I wounded them without realizing it, but it was an unintended wound. And this horrified me a lot, because I had received them. (But) in Chile I received two [abuse victims] as you know, I met others that I kept hidden. In every trip, there is always some possibility. The ones in Philadelphia were published, three (meetings) were published, then the other cases no… And I know how much they suffer, to feel that the Pope says in their face ‘bring me a letter, a proof.’ It's a slap. And I agree that my expression was not apt, because I didn't think, and I understand how the Apostle Peter, in one of his letters, says that the fire has been raised. This is what I can say with sincerity. Barros will remain there if I don't find a way to condemn him. I cannot condemn him if I don't have — I don't say proof — but evidence. And there are many ways to get evidence. Is that clear?

(They announce turbulence on the plane)

They tell me that after the turbulence of Barros and the Sodalitium, we have a more meteorological one...I’ll stay here.

(He sits in a row of seats with the journalists during the turbulence).

Matilde Burgos, CNN Espanol: (Follow up question about Bishop Barros and about a possible distance between the Pope and the people in Chile)

Francis: The case maybe started with the bad decision of the resignation, and he began to be accused. But there is no evidence of abuse. Covering up an abuse is abuse. There is no evidence. There isn’t. The best they believe is this, to provide the evidence quickly. If you think it is like this honestly. I, in this moment, do not think it is so, because there is none. But my heart is open to receive it.

And the other from Chile is made up.

I came from Chile happy, I did not expect that many people in the street. And they weren’t paying an entry fee. The people were not paid nor taken in collectively. The spontaneity of Chile was very strong, even in Iquique, and I thought it was going to be a little thing. But you saw what it was. In the south, the same and in Santiago, the same. The streets of Santiago spoke for themselves.

In this, I think that the responsibility of the informant is to go to the concrete facts. There was this, and this. The thing about a divided people, I do not know where it comes from, it is the first time I hear of it. Maybe Barros is the cause of this, but placing it in its reality it could be because of this. But my impression of Chile was very strong and rewarding. Then, I would like to go back a moment to what most moved me about Chile, at least a moment.

Greg Burke: Let's move on to the Italian group. Andrea Tornielli, Vatican Insider.

Andrea Tornielli (Vatican Insider/La Stampa): Your Holiness, I wanted to talk about what you said in the past day in the Amazon, because there was a new element in that speech: not only the threat posed by the big economic groups, but also the threat — indeed you have talked about perversion — of some environmental policies that end up stifling people's lives. So is there an environmentalism that is against man?

Francis: Yes, yes in that area, I could not at this moment describe it well, but to protect the forest and to save some tribes who ended up outside the forest, because the forest is being finished by exploitation. But the most concrete fact of this case is in the statistics of the area. You will surely find the precise data. It is a phenomenon of preserving the environment and then isolating it, they have remained isolated from real progress. The number that was given there, in that area, the information they sent to prepare the trip, I have studied it.

Greg Burke: Aura Miguel, of Radio Renascenca.

Aura Miguel (Radio Renascenca): The wedding on the airplane. From now on, what would you say to the parish priests, to the bishops will be asked by couples if they can marry them I don’t know where, on the beach, on boats, airplanes?

Francis: You’re imagining a cruise with a wedding. Eh, this would be… One of you told me that I’m crazy for doing these things. The thing was simple. The man was on the first flight. She wasn’t there. I spoke with him… then, I realized that he had become awkward. I spoke of life of how I thought of life, then the life of the family. A nice chat. Then, the day after both of them were there and after we took a photograph, they told me this: ‘We were going to get married in a church, we were married civilly, but the day before’ - you could tell it was a small city - ‘the church was toppled by an earthquake and there was no wedding.’ This was 10 years ago, maybe eight, the earthquake was in 2010, eight years ago. And then [they thought]: “tomorrow we’ll do it,” and “the day after tomorrow.” That’s the way life goes and then the daughter [came] and another daughter. I interrogated them a bit. And the answers were clear, for their whole life…. “You know these things. Do you have a good memory of the catechism?” “We have taken the pre-matrimonial classes.” They were prepared and I judged that they were prepared. They asked me. Sacraments are for people. All of the conditions were clear and why not do today … and not delay it for tomorrow… and maybe after ‘tomorrow’ it would have been eight or 10 years more. This is the answer. I judged that they were prepared, that they knew what they were doing, that each of them was prepared before the Lord with the sacrament of penance. When they had arrived at that point, it was all over. They told me that, they said it to some of you… “We’re going to the Pope to ask if he’ll marry us.” That’s how the thing went. But tell the parish priests that the Pope interrogated them well. And then they had done the pre-marriage course, and they were aware.

Greg Burke: Holiness, we’ve done almost an hour, but I don’t know if we can still do one or two [questions].

Francis: Yes, about the trip.

Greg Burke: On the trip. Nicole Winfield, Associated Press

Francis: Yes, because about Peru, almost nothing [has been asked].

Nicole Winfield (AP): Ah, no more Chile... Holy Father, yesterday Cardinal O’Malley made a statement on these comments about Bishop Barros and he said that words such as these are a source of pain for the survivors of abuse with the effect of making them feel abandoned and discredited… you said that you didn’t feel well [at knowing the victims felt abandoned], and I imagine, I wonder if it was precisely the words of Cardinal O’Malley that made you realize the pain [caused], and then a question linked to this: the Commission for the Protection of Minors, led by Cardinal O’Malley. There was the expiration last month of the first members. There are people who see in this expiration, they ask themselves if this is a sign of a “non-priority” of the protection of minors.

Francis: I understand, I understand. On Cardinal O'Malley, I saw his statement, and he said, "the Pope has always upheld this, the Pope has zero tolerance, the Pope said the other.. with this unhappy expression."

And this has made me think of the word "proof." [It is] calumny, [if] anyone says with obstinacy, without evidence, that he did this, he did that... it is calumny. If I say that he stole and he did not steal, then I am slandering [him], because I do not have evidence, I do not have evidence that he did that to them.

But I have not heard of any victim of Barros... they have not come, they have not given evidences of the judgment. It is a little up in the air. It is a thing that you cannot assume.

You, with goodwill, tell me: there are victims [of Bishop Barros, or of the alleged coverage of Bishop Barros]. But I have not seen them because they have not come to me. It is true that Barros was part of the group of young men [around Karadima]. Barros entered the seminary, I don't know when, but he has been a bishop 24 years. He was probably a priest 15 years, many years. He entered as a very young man,... he says that he did not see it, he was part of the group but then he went another way. And on this we should be clear. One that accuses without evidence, with obstinacy, this is calumny.

But if a person comes and gives me the evidence, I am the first to listen to him. We should be just. I have an appreciation for Cardinal O'Malley, I thank him for his statement because it was very just. He said all that I did and that I do, that the Church does, and then he spoke of the sorrow of the victims. Not in this case, in general. Because many victims feel that they are not able to bring [forward] a document or a testimonial.

The commission was appointed for 3 years I believe, it has expired. I will study a new commission and they, the same commission, decided to renew a part, to nominate new members and others renew. But also before the start of the trip, the definitive list of the commission has come, and now it follows (that) there were some observations on someone that they should clarify, because they are studying the new people. There were two observations that they should clear up. Cardinal O'Malley has worked well, has worked as he should. No, please, do not think that... the time has been a normal amount of time for a nomination of people.

Greg Burke: Holiness, we’ll do a final question, if it’s about the trip.

Unknown Journalist: One of the aims of the Church is to fight against poverty. Chile, in 20 years has lowered the poverty level to 11 percent. Is it, in your perspective, the result of a liberal political [system]? Is there good in liberalism, do you think? I have another small question regarding Cardinal Maradiaga: what do you think of the news of money that regards him? Thanks.

Francis: About Cardinal Maradiaga, it’s not from the trip but I will answer: he has made a signed statement. I say what he said.

About liberalism, I will say that we have to study the cases of liberal politics well. There are other countries in Latin America with liberal politics. I’m not a technician, but in general a liberal political [system] that doesn’t engage all of the peoples, leads downwards. I don’t know in Chile but we see that in other Latin American countries, things are going down.

About the trip, I would like to say something that really moved me: the women’s jail. Well, I have an ever sensitive heart… I’m very sensitive the jails and inmates. I always ask myself about jails, why them and not me. But, to see these women, to see the creativity of these women, the capacity for change, their capacity to change their lives, to reinsert themselves in society with the force of the Gospel. One of you told me that I saw the joy of the children. It moved me. And, I was very moved by that meeting, one of the most beautiful things of the trip. Then, at Puerto Maldonado, that meeting with the indigenous. We are there because obviously - in a moment you’re in their world, no? - that day was the first meeting of the Synod for the Amazon, which will be in 2019. I was so moved by the “Hogar Principito”, to see these kids, the majority abandoned, those young boys and girls who were able, with education, to move ahead. They are professionals. It moved me so much. It’s a work to bring the person upwards. This moved me so much.

Then, the people, the warmth of the people. And today it was unbelievable what was there. The warmth of the people, and I say this nation has faith. This faith was contagious for me and I thank God, and I thank you for the work that awaits you, to write articles and news on the questions you’ve asked me. Thanks for your patience and thanks for the questions. Many thanks.

Greg Burke: Thanks, Holiness, for you patience. Have a good rest and a good dinner.

Put on your surprise face... the wedding ceremony Francis conducted at 36,000 feet looks to have been planned in advance!

The article excerpted below was published by Emol Nacional on 19 December 2017.

In our previous post, Another one from the ‘You can’t make this stuff up’ file — Francis marries couple aboard airplane flight Francis’ Flying Circus, we wrote:

Well, it turns out to have been planned as both Carlos and Paula (the steward and stewardess) said in an interview, published on 19 December 2017, how they wanted Francis to marry them while in the sky!


Excerpt begins...

Marriage in the air

Carlos and Paula met 10 years ago on board of an airplane, and there they have lived their lives so far. "It's already our home," he said. Therefore, to receive Jorge Bergoglio there "is an honor for us, not only as a family, but as workers of this company to be entrusted in such a great mission for our company."

In fact, the crew members were chosen as among the best in the company. While Podest was awarded as "Service Leader" this [year] 2017, Ciuffardi won the award last year.

Paula assured that "this is [not only] a recognition that they are giving us, but all those who are here are service leaders, all have been highlighted in some way by the company."

Both were married in a civil service eight years ago and they now have two daughters, 3 and 6 years old.  Nevertheless, they plan to get married in the Church soon, what they didn't manage to do: the date of the marriage was set for February 27, 2010.

"We couldn't get married in the Church because the of earthquake in 2010, the church fell, everything fell, so we started to postpone it, we started working, then our daughters arrived," Ciuffardi said.

Thus, both hope that in January this delayed plan can finally materialize on the plane and be guided by none other than Pope Francis himself. "We would love it, it's our place, it's our second home, it's where we feel safe," Podest said.

(English translation by CMJ)

 Spanish original...

Matrimonio en los aires 

Carlos y Paula se conocieron hace 10 años arriba de un avión, y ahí han formado su vida hasta el momento. "Es nuestra casa ya", aseguró él. Por eso, recibir a Jorge Bergoglio allí "es un honor para nosotros, no solamente como familia, sino como trabajadores de esta empresa de poder ser encomendados en tal magna misión para nuestra empresa".

De hecho, los tripulantes fueron escogidos entre los mejores de la compañía. Mientras Podest fue premiada como "Líder de Servicio" este 2017, Ciuffardi obtuvo el galardón el año pasado.

Paula aseguró que "este es un reconocimiento que nos están haciendo, pero todos los que están acá son líderes de servicio, todos han sido destacados de alguna manera por la compañía".

Ambos se casaron por el civil hace ocho años y ahora tienen dos hijas, de 3 y 6 años. Sin embargo, planeaban casarse por la Iglesia al poco tiempo, lo que no alcanzaron a hacer: la fecha del matrimonio estaba fijada para el 27 de febrero de 2010.

"No pudimos casarnos por la Iglesia porque fue el terremoto de 2010, se cayeron las iglesia, se cayó todo. Así que lo empezamos a aplazar, empezamos a trabajar, después llegaron las hijas", contó Ciuffardi.

Así, ambos esperan que en enero próximo este postergado plan pueda finalmente concretarse sobre el avión y dirigido nada menos que por el mismísimo Papa Francisco. "Nos encantaría. Es nuestro lugar, es nuestra segunda casa, es donde nos sentimos seguros", manifestó Podest.

source: Emol Nacional, Con emoción y nerviosismo: Tripulación del avión que trasladará al Papa en Chile cuenta cómo recibieron la noticia

archived: http://archive.is/YKumS

P. T. Barnum could learn a trick or two from 

Francis and his Flying Circus!

Another one from the ‘You can’t make this stuff up’ file — Francis marries couple aboard airplane flight

Francis’ Flying Circus

"A small ceremony was started in the place, he asked us for the rings and he asked us if there was love in our marriage, if we wanted to continue together our entire lives," said Carlos Ciuffardi, cabin crewman and brand new husband of Paula Podest, cabin manager.

The Pope asked Ciuffardi if Paula was still the boss, to which she replied "yes".

"And I'm still the boss," she added smiling.

source: La Cronica, Papa realiza primera boda en avión

Francis presides at the wedding ceremony of Latam Airlines flight attendants Carlos Ciuffardi Elorriaga and Paula Podest Ruiz, civilly married for ten years with two daughters — Rafaella, 6, and Isabella, 3.

Paula Podest Ruiz, 39, and Carlos Ciuffardi Elorriga, 41, told Francisco that they were married as a civilian, and although they had planned their religious ceremony in a church in Santiago, it could not be carried out because it suffered serious damage in the earthquake of 2010.

Because of this, the crew members asked for the blessing for their marriage. But he had something else in mind.

"Do you want me to marry you?" Asked the Supreme Pontiff. "Here?" Replied the astonished spouses.

The Pope said yes and made a brief ceremony in the front of the plane.

Ignacio Cueto, chairman of the board of LATAM Airlines, was an official witness and a document was signed by a Chilean bishop on board.

"Everything is valid. Everything is official, "said Vatican spokesman Greg Burke. "We will show you an image of the document later," he added.

source: Circulo Rojo de Mexico,EL PAPA FRANCISCO CELEBRA BODA EN PLENO VUELO

Bride Paola Podest, 39, and groom Carlos Ciuffardi, 41, said “I do” after telling Francis that they had been married in a civil service in 2010 but had been unable to follow up with a church ceremony because of the Feb. 27, 2010, earthquake that rocked Chile.

Francis then offered to marry the LATAM flight attendants aboard the aircraft en route to the northern city of Iquique, and they readily agreed. The head of the airline served as the witness.

“He told me it’s historic, that there has never before been a pope who married someone aboard a plane,” Ciuffardi told journalists in the aisle of the Airbus 321.

Ciuffardi said the pope also told them: “This is the sacrament that is missing in the world, the sacrament of marriage. May this motivate others to get the sacrament of marriage. I’ll do it for this reason.”

source: Time, Pope Francis Performs First Airborne Papal Wedding During Flight in Chile

The hand-written document, signed by Francis, attesting to the wedding of  

Paula Podest Ruiz and Carlos Ciuffardi Elorriaga aboard the papal plane.

The remarkable wedding transpired seemingly spontaneously, as is often the case with the ever-surprising Francis: The flight crew was gathering in the front of the plane for a photo with the pope when the couple told him they were married and he motioned for them to sit next to him.

"We told him that we are husband and wife, that we have two daughters and that we would have loved to receive his blessing," Ciuffardi said. "All of a sudden he asked us if we were married in the church, too."

The couple explained that their church's bell tower had fallen during the quake, forcing the cancellation of the service. One thing led to another, and they never followed up.

"He liked us and he asked, 'Do you want me to marry you?'" Ciuffardi recounted. "He asked: 'Are you sure?' 'Yes, of course!' we said."

A Vatican official hastily drew up an official, albeit handwritten marriage certificate, stating that the two had consented to the sacrament of marriage on Jan. 18 and that Francis had celebrated the marriage "aboard the papal plane from Santiago to Iquique."

A stunned Podest was nearly speechless during the remaining hour on the flight as she recounted the story to the 70 or so journalists who travel with the pope on his foreign trips.

She said Francis offered a bit of advice to the not-so-newlyweds: "The wedding rings shouldn't be too tight, because they'll torture you, but if they're too loose, they'll fall off. So we have to be careful," she said blushing.

Podest said she and Ciuffardi had also explained to Francis that when they first started dating, she was his boss at LATAM. Francis asked if she was still the boss, and both readily agreed.

"And that's why the marriage works," Ciuffardi said.

After applause — and a breakfast of fresh fruit, croissants, coffee and tea — the plane landed in Iquique and the couple bid the passengers farewell.

"We hope you had a good flight," the bride said.

source: ABC 13 News, Love in the air: Pope marries couple on papal plane in Chile

To recap, a steward and a stewardess were civilly married in 2010 because the church they were to marry in collapsed in an earthquake.  They couldn’t find another church during the eight years of their civil marriage apparently because they were too busy raising their two daughters and flying around South America working.  Yep and this couple just happened to be so lucky as to meet Francis on the airplane where coincidence of coincidences he spontaneously proposed to marry them, in order to “motivate others to get the sacrament of marriage.”  What’s the difference between a religious wedding in a church with a Mass and the performance that Francis just gave?  Apparently not much in the eyes of the Novus Ordo!  It’s all good, as Greg Burke assured them, “Everything is valid. Everything is official.”  An obvious Opus-(Ju)Dei photo-op.

“the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null.”

Francis, 16 June 2016

drive thru annulments

Francis’ audience with the participants in the Course promoted by the Tribunal of the Roman Rota, 25.11.2017, with the theme ‘The new marriage annulment process and the Super Rato procedure’

Dear brothers and sisters,

I am pleased to meet you at the end of the training course for clerics and laity promoted by the Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota on the subject of the new matrimonial process and the Super Rato process. I thank the Dean, Msgr. Pinto, for his words. The course that has taken place here in Rome, and those held in other dioceses, are praiseworthy and encouraging initiatives, as they contribute to gaining a proper knowledge and an exchange of experiences at various ecclesial levels regarding major canonical procedures.

In particular, it is necessary to pay great attention and to adequate analyze to the two recent Motu proprio, Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus and Mitis et misericors Iesus, in order to apply the new procedures they establish. These two acts have arisen from a synodal context, they are the expression of a synodal method, and they are the arrival point of a serious synodal path. Faced with the most thorny questions concerning the evangelizing mission and the salvation of souls, it is important for the Church increasingly to recover the synodal practice of the first community in Jerusalem, where Peter together with the other Apostles and with the whole community under the action of the Holy Spirit endeavoured to act according to the commandment of the Lord Jesus.

This is what has been done in the synodal assemblies on the family, in which, in the spirit of communion and fraternity, representatives of the episcopate from all over the world gathered in assembly to listen to the voice of the communities to discuss, reflect and carry out the work of discernment. The Synod had the purpose of promoting and defending the Christian family and marriage for the greater good of spouses faithful to the covenant celebrated in Christ. It also had to study the situation and development of the family in today’s world, preparation for marriage, ways to help those who suffer as a result of the failure of their marriage, the education of children, and other issues.

As you return to your communities, strive to be missionaries and witnesses of the synodal spirit that is at their origin, as well as of the pastoral consolation that is the purpose of this new matrimonial provision, so as to strengthen the faith of the holy people of God through charity. May the synodal spirit and pastoral consolation become the form of your action in the Church, especially in field as delicate as that of the family in search of the truth about the conjugal state of spouses. With this attitude, each of you is a sincere collaborator of your bishop, to whom the new norms grant a decisive role, especially in the streamlined briefer process, as he is the natural judge of the particular Church.

In your service, you are called to be close to the solitude and suffering of the faithful who expect from ecclesial justice the competent and factual help to restore peace to their consciences and God’s will on readmission to the Eucharist. Hence, the need and the value of the course you have attended – and I hope that others will be organized – to promote a just approach to the matter and an increasingly wide-ranging and serious study of the new matrimonial process. It is an expression of the Church that is able to welcome and care for those who are wounded in various ways by life and, at the same time, it is an appeal for the defence of the sacredness of the marriage bond.

To make the application of the new law for marriage process, two years after its promulgation, the cause and reason for salvation and peace for the great number of faithful who are wounded in their matrimonial situation, I have decided, in my office as bishop of Rome and Peter’s Successor, to specify some fundamental aspects of the two Motu proprio, especially the figure of the diocesan bishop as personal and single judge in the streamlined process.

The diocesan bishop has always been Iudex unum et idem cum Vicario iudiciali; but since this principle is interpreted as de facto excluding the personal exercise of the diocesan bishop, delegating almost everything to the Tribunals, I establish as follows how I consider to be decisive and exclusive the personal exercise of the role of judge by the diocesan bishop:

1.         The diocesan bishop, by virtue of his pastoral office, is the personal and sole judge in the briefer process.

2.         Therefore, the figure of the diocesan-bishop-judge is the architrave, the constitutive principle and the discriminating element of the entire briefer process, established by the two Motu proprio.

3.         In the briefer process, two indispensable conditions are required, ad validitatem: the episcopate, and the fact of being the head of a diocesan community of faithful (cf. canon 381 § 2). If one of the two conditions is not met, the briefer process cannot be followed. The case must be judged via the ordinary process.

4.         The exclusive and personal jurisdiction of the diocesan bishop, set out in the fundamental criteria of the briefer process, refers directly to the ecclesiology of Vatican Council II, which reminds us that the bishop already has by consecration the fullness of all the authority that is ad actum expedita, through the missio canonica.

5.         The streamlined process is not an option that the diocesan bishop can choose, but rather an obligation that derives from his consecration and from the missio received.  He holds exclusive competence in the three phases of the briefer process:

— the request must always be addressed to the diocesan bishop;

— the preliminary phase, as I have already affirmed in my address at the Course held by the Roman Rota on 12 March last year, will be conducted by the bishop «always assisted by the judicial vicar or other instructor, even a layperson, by the assessor, and always with the presence of the defender of the bond”. Should the bishop not have the assistance of clerical or lay canonists, the charity, which distinguishes episcopal office, of a nearby bishop may come to his aid for the time necessary. Furthermore, I reiterate that the briefer process must typically be concluded in one session, requiring as an indispensible condition the absolute evidence of the facts proving the alleged nullity of the marriage, as well as the consent of both spouses.

the decision to pronounce coram Domino is always and only taken by the diocesan bishop. 

6.         To entrust the entire briefer process to the interdiocesan court (either neighbouring or multiple dioceses) would lead to a distortion and reduction of the figure of the bishop, from father, head and judge of his faithful to a mere signatory of the judgement.

7.         Mercy, one of the fundamental criteria ensuring the salus, requires that the diocesan bishop implement the briefer process as soon as possible; should he not consider himself ready at present to do so, the case must be addressed via the ordinary process, which must in any case be conducted with the proper solicitude.

8.         Closeness and gratuitousness, as I have repeated several times, are the two pearls most needed by the poor, whom the Church must love more than anything else.

9.         With regard to jurisdiction, in receiving the appeal against the affirmative judgement in the briefer process, on the part of the Metropolitan or of the bishop indicated in the new canon 1687, it is specified that the new law confers to the Dean of the Rota a new and therefore constitutive potestas decidendi regarding the rejection or admission of the appeal.

In conclusion, I would like to reiterate clearly that this is to occur without asking for permission or authorization from another Institution or from the Apostolic Signatura.

Dear brothers and sisters, I wish you well for this study and for the ecclesial service of each one of you. May the Lord bless you and Our Lady protect you. And please, do not forget to pray for me. Thank you.

Remember this modernist clown thinks that an annulment should be free because it’s a sacrament!

Related:

• Francis does it again!

• Francis has a dream... saving souls with free annulments!

• Vatican in an uproar over Francis' recent decision regarding marriage annulments

• Francis says most marriages are invalid because couples don't understand their wedding vows!

• Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller proposes extending Pauline privilege to “baptized Christians [who are] not sufficiently evangelized.”

the blabbering modernist never stops...

— English transcript —

Dear brothers and sisters, good morning!

I cordially greet all of you who attend the third International Symposium on the Apostolic Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia, convened by the Office for Pastoral Care of the Family of the Italian Bishops’ Conference.

The theme you have proposed: The Gospel of Love between Conscience and Norm, is of great importance, and can illuminate the path that the Churches in Italy are taking, in order to respond to the desire for family that emerges in the soul of the young generations. Love between a man and a woman is obviously among the most generative human experiences; it is the leaven of a culture of encounter, and introduces to the present world an injection of sociality. Indeed “the good of the family is decisive for the future of the world and of the Church. (Amoris laetitia, 31)” The family born of marriage creates fruitful bonds, which reveal themselves to be the most effective antidote against the individualism that currently runs rampant; however, along the journey of marital love and family life there are situations that require arduous choices, which must be made with rectitude. In the domestic reality, sometimes there are concrete knots to be addressed with prudent conscience on the part of each. It is important that spouses, parents, be not left alone, but accompanied in their commitment to applying the Gospel to the concreteness of life. On the other hand, we know well that “we are called to form consciences, not to pretend to substitute them. (Ibid., 37)”

The contemporary world risks confusing the primacy of conscience, which is always to be respected, with the exclusive autonomy of the individual with respect to the relations that he entertains in life.

As I said recently to the Pontifical Academy for Life, “There are those who even speak of ego-latry, that is, of a true worship of the ego, on whose altar is sacrificed everything, including the dearest affections. This perspective is not harmless: it molds a subject that looks constantly in the mirror, until it becomes incapable of turning its eyes to others and the world. The spread of this attitude has most serious consequences for all the affections and ties of life. (5 Oct., 2017)” This is a “pollution” that corrodes souls and confounds minds and hearts, producing false illusions.

Romano Guardini, in a text on the subject of conscience, indicates the way to the search for the true good. He writes: “From this imprisonment in myself I am free only if I find a point, which is not my ego: a height higher than myself; something solid and working in my interior – and behold! Here we are come to the core [...] that is, to religious reality. That good [...] is something alive. [...] It is the fullness of worth, which belongs to the selfsame living God. (La coscienza, Brescia 1933, 32-33)”

In the very depths of each one of us there is a place wherein the Mystery reveals itself, and illuminates the person, making the person the protagonist of his story. Conscience, as the II Vatican Council recalls, is this, “most secret core and sanctuary of a man. There he is alone with God, Whose voice echoes in his depths. (GS 16)” To the Christian falls the task of being vigilant, so that in this sort of tabernacle is no want of divine grace, which illuminates and strengthens married love and parental mission. Grace fills the amphorae of human hearts with an extraordinary capacity for gift, renewing for the families of today the miracle of the wedding feast at Cana.

Commenting on that Gospel episode, I have been able to say that, “By transforming into wine the water of the jars used ‘for the Jewish rites of purification’ (Jn 2:6), Jesus preforms an eloquent sign: he transforms the Law of Moses into the Gospel, bearer of joy. (Gen. Audience, June 8, 2016)” Jesus points in particular to the medicine of mercy, which cures the hardness of the heart, restoring the relationship between husband and wife, and between parents and children.

Dear Brothers and Sisters, I wish all the best for your work in this Symposium. Let the Church in Italy help to assimilate and develop Amoris laetitia’s content and style; may she contribute to the formation of family group animators in parishes, associations, and movements; may she support the journey of so many families, helping them to live the joy of the Gospel, and to be active cells in the community. I bless you, and I ask you, please, to pray for me.

BBC asks, “Is the Pope Catholic?”

There are errors galore in this BBC piece but it is interesting in the sense that the mainstream media is having to publicly ask the question and reassure its listeners in the affirmative.

BBC, ‘There’s never been a more catholic 

Pope than Francis in recent memory!’

source: BBC Radio, Is the Pope Catholic?

Related:

• Francis ‘the humble’ is “boiling with rage” because four cardinals ask him to clarify Amoris Laetitia

• Francis may not want to clarify Amoris Laetitia but Antonio Spadaro has no qualms doing so

• Rome covered in Anti-Francis posters

• Last week it was anti-Francis posters, this week a Fake L’Osservatore Romano

• Straight from the hypocrite’s mouth...

• Francis’ yes men (the Council of Cardinals) declare that they support his revolution

• The SSPX weighs in on the pasquino against Francis and the fake L'Osservatore Romano

• Francis’ first interview with a German language publication

• John Paul II would have had no problem with Amoris Laetitia

• What was Francis reaction when he read this letter?

• Edward Pentin ‘Francis wants dialogue with everybody but his own cardinals’

• Francis' ostpolitik — selfies for a sycophant’s family

• Francis spoke about ‘Amoris Laetitia’ in Colombia. Was it because the “Filial Correction” was weighing on his mind?

• Oh, the irony...

• Francis doesn’t make the time to answer ‘dubia’ and ‘filial correction’ but his stooges do!

Francis doesn’t make the time to answer ‘dubia’ and ‘filial correction’ but his stooges do!

All will be answered, on November 10th, in “Risposte amichevoli ai critici di Amoris laetitiaˮ (Friendly answers to the critics of Amoris laetitia).  Written by professional academic and politician, Rocco Buttiglione, with introductory essay by Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Destruction of the Faith. The old adage says one shouldn’t judge a book by its cover but let’s make an exception in this case.  Fives slashes in yellow fabric represent, what could it represent?  The five dubia? Tears in the papal color of yellow?  A coming schism?


More:

• Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller proposes extending Pauline privilege to “baptized Christians [who are] not sufficiently evangelized.”

Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller proposes extending Pauline privilege to “baptized Christians [who are] not sufficiently evangelized.”

“In the global situation, in which virtually there are no longer any more homogeneously Christian environments that can offer the individual Christian the support of a collective mentality and in the “only partial identification” with the Catholic faith and with its ensuing sacramental, moral and spiritual life, perhaps the problem, mutatis mutandis, of a dissolution of a first marriage contracted not “in the Lord” (1 Corinthians 7:39) in favorem fidei. may also arise for the baptized Christians that were not sufficiently evangelized.” 

source: La Stampa, Communion to the remarried, Müller, “There can be mitigating factors in guilt”

Flashback to 2015....

Curial cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller does not rule out admitting remarried divorcees to Communion “in extreme individual cases”, according to media reports. Although a general admittance to Communion for such members of the faithful could not be granted, in specific cases there could be “an admittance in the realm of conscience”, the leader of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said in a conversation with “Focus” magazine. This was also the view of John Paul II’s 1981 document “Familiaris consortio” (n. 84), according to Muller. “It is possible to think further in this direction”, the German cardinal said. In any case one would have to proceed in accordance with “theologically justifiable perspectives”.
As prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Muller is participating in the world synod of bishops currently in session. He is part of the German language group, in which are represented nearly all synod participants from Germany and Austria, among them Cardinals Walter Kasper, Reinhard Marx, and Christoph Schönborn. 

(“Kardinal Müller: Kommunion für Wiederverheiratete im Einzelfall denkbar”, Radio Vatikan, Oct. 18, 2015; our translation.)

source: Novus Ordo Wire, “Cardinal” Muller: Communion for Adulterers “Conceivable” in “Exceptional Cases”

And remember Francis said this is 2016,

“It’s provisional, and because of this the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null. Because they say “yes, for the rest of my life!” but they don’t know what they are saying. Because they have a different culture. They say it, they have good will, but they don’t know.”

[...]

Pope Francis attributed the marriage crisis to people who “don’t know what the sacrament is” and don’t know “the beauty of the sacrament.”

“They don’t know that it’s indissoluble, they don’t know that it’s for your entire life. It’s hard,” the Pope said.

[...]

 “I’ve seen a lot of fidelity in these cohabitations, and I am sure that this is a real marriage, they have the grace of a real marriage because of their fidelity”

source: Call Me Jorge..., Francis says most marriages are invalid because couples don't understand their wedding vows!

More inversion of the Church...

Down is up, up is down, left is right, right is left, 

vice is virtue, virtue is vice, etc...