And then these things appear, as would be predictable... Maybe Pope Francis created a hero, but he is not my hero. The excommunication of Carlo Maria Viganò is completely illogical, compared to the support that homosexualist James Martin receives, for example. However, excommunicating Carlo Maria Viganò is not the same thing as excommunicating Cardinal Burke or any of the Dubia cardinals.
This video recorded this week at the festivities of San Fermin, Pamplona, Spain, reminds me a little of the current moment in the Church:
The Archbishop did an interview with Robert Moynihan back in the Fall of 2021....It was/is more relevant now than 3 years ago, imo....... The video as well as a transcript have been posted, I believe today, on his web site. The link is below for those who may find it helpful or interesting......a lot has happened in the three years since it was recorded..... https://exsurgedomine.it/210900-henry-moynihan-eng/
Vigano's comments on the vaccines were solid. It's his rejection of Pope Francis as Pope, and his practical rejection of all the Popes and Magisterium from the Second Vatican Council (effective 60 year sedevacantism again), that is problematic/schismatic. Here are some of his comments in response to the excommunication which again shows the extremism: https://wherepeteris.com/english-translation-of-viganos-excommunication-decree/ 1. “The Council represents the ideological, theological, moral or liturgical cancer of which the Bergoglian “synodal church” is necessary metastasis. (…) I repudiate the neo-modernist errors inherent in the Second Vatican Council and in the so-called “postconciliar magisterium, particularly in matters of collegiality, ecumenism, religious freedom, the secularity of the state and liturgy” So, an (1) Ecumenical Council of the Church's Supreme Magisterium is supposedly a "Cancer". (2) There is no real post-Conciliar Magisterium, just a "so-called" one, and filled with errors. etc. And he goes on like this, and it's clear he's trying to appeal to a small section of schismatic sedevacantists, and repeats their errors. Again, he criticizes not only Pope Francis but the entire Magisterium for the last 60 years as being supposedly polluted with error. That's not Catholic, and not possible. Msgr. Fenton, a pre-Vatican II theologian says: "It is, of course, possible that the Church might come to modify its stand on some detail of teaching presented as non-infallible matter in a papal encyclical. The nature of the auctoritas providentiae doctrinalis within the Church is such, however, that this fallibility extends to questions of relatively minute detail or of particular application. The body of doctrine on the rights and duties of labor, on the Church and State, or on any other subject treated extensively in a series of papal letters directed to and normative for the entire Church militant could not be radically or completely erroneous. The infallible security Christ wills that His disciples should enjoy within His Church is utterly incompatible with such a possibility." http://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/encyclicals/docauthority.htm Let's pray for Vigano. He can do good, but he must remain in, or now return to, the Church, not reject communion with the Pope, and with his brother Bishops in communion with the Pope.
You are claiming that Archbishop Vigano rejects all Popes since Vatican II. Are you sure about this? When I read Archbishop Vigano's statement, it seemed to me that he made it clear he is not in communion with 'Pope Francis' whilst avoiding a clear statement on classic sedevacantism. It is either Arbhishop Vigano or 'Pope Francis' that is in schism with the Holy Catholic Church. The question depends on whether 'Pope Francis' is truly the Holy Father and on other questions of fact. You are making an assumption by calling Archbishop Vigano a schismatic. This is for the hierarchy of the Holy Catholic Church to decide, who is currently in crisis, or has been usurped, according to Archbishop Vigano. This, of course, presents a dilemma, or a Catch-22, if you will. It could well be that Archbishop Vigano is correct here, and you are incorrect. To call somebody an extremist is not much more than a leftist label. There is little to no substance in this allegation. What are you trying to achieve? The fruits of Vatican II speak for themselves. A widespread loss of faith, empty churches, Holy Orders of the Novus Ordo-rite dying out. Pew research shows that many Novus Ordo-Catholics do not adhere to some Catholic teachings, for example regarding contraception or even abortion, etc. The only way to begin to healing problem is to outline it clearly. The solution could be found in a return to tradition. God bless!
Vigano the fall guy is a mere smokescreen. Meanwhile, the German schismatic way continues. The Francis sinodal way (a nod to sin) continues and many souls are lost because of modernist false teachings that have infected the church like a cancer. Woe to those false teachers it would be better if a millstone be tied to their necks. Many Cardinals, many Bishops and many Priests are on the road to perdition and are taking many souls with them. Garabandal
Yes, I also have that suspicion that Vigano is the fall guy and a mere smokescreen. We must careful, we cannot be too trusting. After all, schism of the Holy Catholic Church is precisely what they are trying to achieve. 'Pope Francis' himself has made it clear already in 2016 that he "may enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church": https://onepeterfive.com/pope-francis-reported-words-might-go-history-split-church/ God bless all here!
I have wondered if Vigano is an act, controlled opposition, but I don't have enough information, so I give him the benefit of the doubt. That being said I do think it is possible that he wanted to be excommunicated before he dumps a bunch of incriminating information. Because then the narrative shifts to Pope Francis having excommunicated someone because they had dirt on him. Which, if true, will only push a schism further. Because the Pope Francis camp will dismiss it all saying it is all fake and done out of revenge. None of this seems like it is going to end well, controlled opposition or not.
Vigano is simply following the command of the angel in Apocalypse 18: 1 And after these things, I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power: and the earth was enlightened with his glory. 2 And he cried out with a strong voice, saying: Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen; and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every unclean spirit, and the hold of every unclean and hateful bird: 3 Because all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication; and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her; and the merchants of the earth have been made rich by the power of her delicacies. 4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues. 5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and the Lord hath remembered her iniquities.
Yes, I think you may have nailed it. This is very possible. Can't be too careful these days. One has to become almost paranoid. But, I too, give Vigano the benefit of doubt. One of our forum member's motto is: "Safe in the barque of Peter." Perhaps then the recognise & resist-approach of the SSPX is the most prudent one. I must say, I find it difficult to inwardly believe that 'Pope Francis' is the Holy Father. I have doubts, based on objective facts. But outwardly, I do express that Pope Francis is the Supreme Pontiff. I attend SSPX-masses, which are "una cum". Again, I think this is the most prudent position because I have no authority to judge. Hopefully, I will not get excommunicated. Difficult times! God bless all here.
His anger is palpable. He fell on the sword, but it maybe didn't have the effect he had hoped for, hence the anger......the worst thing anyone can do, imo, at this point is "run ahead of God's grace". Something we each must discern for ourselves......it's easy to say well, it's gonna get worse. But then when it actually does get worse, it's still kind of a shock......Maybe the poor archbishop ran ahead of God's grace. He really said it all back in 2021. And nothing happened to him......he just went too far in 2024. A warning to the faithful, imho ~
Yes, Vigano said that the mainstream Catholic Church is nothing but the ape of the Church or "After-Church" as seen in the visions of Anna Katharina Emmerich. Emmerich had true visions, based on which the House of the Blessed Virgin Mary was discovered in Ephesus. She also saw the new form of the Mass (Novus Ordo), already in the 1800s! So Emmerich can be trusted. Mel Gibson based his film about the Passion of the Christ on Emmerich's visions, as written down by Clemens Brentano. Mel Gibson has come out in support of Vigano, stating he also believes that today's mainstream Catholic Church is the ape of the Church or Anti-Church. Difficult times, it is hard to stay the course. Let us pray our Rosaries. I feel pretty good in an SSPX-parish for now, as they seem to keep the course pretty well with recognise and resist-attitude towards Pope Francis. But things will get harder. Let us trust in Our Good Lord and his Holy and Blessed Mother. God bless!
There is only one Church. Large parts of the church has been infected by heresy and false teaching. But there are also some sound parishes that are orthodox. This is the dilemma we are in that there is a cancer in the body of the church which I call the spirit of Vatican II (the spirit of ambiguity and confusion). Francis is a by product of the ambiguities of the council because he is a product of the council and he has perfected the art of ambiguity.
Yes, I think what you are saying is, to stay in our Holy Catholic Church, even while she is sick with cancer. I hear you! Yes, I agree, the spirit of Vatican II (or modernism) is a cancer, and it has been spreading. However, I think, with 'Pope Francis' they have taken things to another level. Whilst some of teachings of the Holy Fathers since Vatican II may have been influenced by the heresies of modernism, I think they were true Popes. This is evident by the fact that they tried to kill St JP II on 13 May 1981 and they possibly 'nudged' Pope Benedict to resign in 2013. This has been foretold in Malachi Martin's book Windswept House (although he thought it would happen to St JP II, not to his successor). This, and other facts, give me reason to consider that Pope Benedict's resignation may have been invalid, so we could be facing a sede vacante-situation since 1 January 2023. By the way, Windswept House, as I understood it, described St JP II as a holy and wise man, whose hands were tied because the dark sect had already taken over much of the Church structure. I am just gathering opinions and trying to discern. I don't have all the answers.' God bless all here! We are still praying Rosaries for all here and your friends and family members, and for some forum members in particular.
No ambiguities with Christ! Verse 10 is a challenge but we must take up our crosses and trust in Him! Isaiah 50: 10 Who among you fears the Lord and obeys the voice of his servant, who walks in darkness and has no light, yet trusts in the name of the Lord and relies upon his God? 11 Behold, all you who kindle a fire, who set brands alight! Walk by the light of your fire, and by the brands which you have kindled! This shall you have from my hand: you shall lie down in torment.
Yes, that's right. He rejects Pope Francis explicitly, and the others implicitly, by rejecting their Magisterium, which he calls a "so-called Magisterium". He was on this dangerous path even some time back and it has now culminated in his excommunication and schism. To not be in communion with and subjection to the reigning Pope and the members of the Church subject is the textbook definition of Schism. How convenient. The Pope has decided, and the Catholic Hierarchy has confirmed it. Please read this 1P5 article from Siscoe on Universal Recognition of the Pope by the Catholic Episcopate and how it infallibly proves the man elected is the True Pope: He cites Cardinal +Billot: "Therefore, from the moment in which the Pope is accepted by the Church and united to her as the head to the body, it is no longer permitted to raise doubts about a possible vice of election or a possible lack of any condition whatsoever necessary for legitimacy. For the aforementioned adhesion of the Church heals in the root all fault in the election and proves infallibly the existence of all the required conditions." https://onepeterfive.com/dogmatic-fact-francis-pope/ Or, it could be that Pope Francis and 5000 Catholic Bishops are correct, and Vigano is incorrect. Cardinal Burke, Cardinal Sarah and the Dubia Cardinals etc are still in communion with the Pope. Holy Orders dying out? Eucharistic Miracles say otherwise. 5 Eucharistic Miracles in the last 25 years here, all Novus Ordo: https://youth.rcdow.org.uk/voices/5-incredible-eucharistic-miracles-from-the-last-25-years/ Return to Tradition is good. Sedevacantism is not. God Bless.
X. Wernz, P. Vidal: “Finally they cannot be numbered among the schismatics, who refuse to obey the Roman Pontiff because they consider his person to be suspect or doubtfully electedon account of rumours in circulation.” (Ius Canonicum, 7:398, 1943) Rev Ignatius Szal: “Nor is there any schism if one merely transgress a papal law for the reason that one considers it too difficult, or if one refuses obedience inasmuch as one suspects the person of the pope or the validity of his election, or if one resists him as the civil head of a state.” (Communication of Catholics with Schismatics, 1948) De Lugo: “Neither is someone a schismatic for denying his subjection to the Pontiff on the grounds that he has solidly founded [‘probabiliter’] doubts concerning the legitimacy of his election or his power [refers to Sanchez and Palao].” (Disp., De Virt. Fid. Div., disp xxv, sect iii, nn. 35-8)
