Yes, we do go round and round. For a while, one topic will get a lot of traction, and then there will be a lull, and another topic will be hotly debated. That seems to be the nature of forums. I liken it to the old alehouse or tavern model.

Have you ever read Chesterton's views of how the local tavern worked in the last century and before that? The way they worked was that the men of the community would gather in the local tavern to socialize and debate and discuss certain topics, often political. These taverns (at least in England and Ireland) served a public good. Not sure that they work in the same way anymore.

We could be backing the wrong side....that's true. And we may change our minds along the way, but if we are lucky, we'll learn something from it.

Have you ever wondered why women weren't allowed in those taverns? (I am guessing, please correct me if I am wrong)

My brain is a crazy thing.  I see the points of both sides, so it is really hard for me to decide on one. 
Women look at things a little differently than men and I think their contribution to debate is welcomed, sometimes I am not sure the men, sorry men it is just how I feel, appreciate this. 

I don't like pointing at specific people, but I do know some men are not like this.

Do you think if we could see each others faces these debates would look different?

It's not fair to project your feelings on others.  If this topic/thread causes you to react negatively, then it's your obligation to "take a timeout" and stop reading, not to tell everyone else to stop.

It is a free forum to express my feelings and thoughts, I am not just a logical robot.  I sensed something from the crowd and said what I said.  If it bothers you so much you don't have to engage. 

And please explain to me what exactly was so negative about my post.  Was it the emotion you inferred from it?  They were just words.  Why did you interpret them the way you did?

Have you tried to email +Vigano and ask? And if you get a response, please share.  I haven't worked up the courage to send that letter.

And yes I think Lad should be consistent.  No hard feelings.

I suppose in this day and age, the laity are required to write to a bishop to ask if he was conditionally consecrated. It's been the case before that the laity has had to do this. But why should any of us have to write to the one who was supposedly conditionally consecrated, when that should be public knowledge? "Public" as in the consecration of a bishop is for the benefit of the Catholic Church, and her members. It isn't supposed to be a secret thing. Even in this day and age. What was the problem, that the reason for the secret consecration has not been made known? And no one can prove, so far, that it has been done. We are just supposed to trust certain people on a forum that it has been done, and that should be good enough. The Church doesn't work that way.

Why they do not?  Don't know.

I'm fairly certain that I know why.  If you've followed +Vigano since he started out as a Traditional Catholic about 4 years ago now, and I know you have, you'll realize that he takes everything one step at a time.  He realizes that he's a late-comer to Tradition and has been wondering how he can make a difference, attempting to discern why God called him so late to Tradition.  I believe he sees it as his mission from God to open the eyes of the Conciliar conservatives, and in order to accomplish that, he can't lose them too fast.  Had it come out immediately that +Vigano holds NO Orders to be doubful, and as an SV who denounces all the Popes since Pius XII, he would have lost his following among Trad, Inc. and the conservative types very quickly, thus defeting his mission.

So he's been taking it one step at a time, where each little step is palatable to the Conciliar conservatives and doesn't lose them completely, so then with each step he can bring along to the following step any who remain with him after the previous step.  Bishop Sanborn, in his last video, said he may have been "impatient" and realizes that +Vigano is taking his time so that he doesn't "shock people".  And it's not just about shocking them, but about losing them too quickly.  This is a very deliberate pedagogical approach, similar to boil the frog, but more in opening their eyes little by little.  If someone has been in total darkness, you can't just blast a spotlight into their eyes to help them see, since they'll just be blinded by the light (so the opposite of seeing), and will just turn away from the pain.  But if you turn up the light just a little, let their eyes adjust, then turn it up a little more, let them adjust again, that's your only realistic hope of opening their eyes completely to the light.

I just think that a public annoucement of the conditional consecration would have been too much too soon for the Conciliar conservatives, many of whom have spent decades attending Motu Masses, which +Vigano would thereby imply to have been of positively doubtful validity.  Many of them also worship the ground on which St. John Paul II the Great Wojtyla walked, and +Vigano was originally "consecrated" by Wojtyla.

With every statement of +Vigano's, I pointed out, "ah, see this here, where he's implying the next step", and in every case I got it right.  I could go back and find my old posts.  But I saw what he was doing very clearly right out of the gate.

As you yourself cited, he's clearly IMPLICITLY laid out his next step in the last declaration, namely, that he's going to explicitly call Roncalli/Montini - Ratzinger Antipopes as well.  From the principles he laid out, that conclusion is unavoidable, but he didn't say it in so many words, so as not to shock those who are still with him after having outed Bergoglio.  With each step he makes, he also lays the groundwork for the next step, letting both the previous step and the principles toward the next step sink in and percolate.  He'll take some time, perhaps weeks, perhaps months, to let it sink in, and then, from among those who are still with him, he'll make the next statement.  I suspect that it'll be the step after that one where he'll come out to publicly announce the conditional consecration.  In the meantime, he and Bishop Williamson have let it slip out in the dark recesses of the internet (i.e. here on CathInfo), so that people who may want to know can find out, but because neither have declared it, it remains in "ugly rumor among those schismatics on CathInfo" territory.  Some might recall that it's what +Mendez referred to the ordinations of Frs. Greenwell and Baumburger, an "ugly rumor".

+Vigano is a brilliant man, and he knows what he's doing, and what he's doing is very deliberate, in the manner of a teacher trying to convert huge masses to Tradition, without losing them.  So what good would he have done if he had immediately come out guns-a-blazing to excoriate the entire Conciliar establishment?  He would have been preaching to the choir, the existing Trads, but would have exstinguished all hope of making new Traditional Catholic converts.  Which is more important, to allow some Trads and dogmatic SVs to thump their chests, or to convert more souls to Tradition?  It's the same approach he took with Trump.  He knows Trump's psychological makeup and knows that coming out and excoriating Trump would have had no effect other than to have him double down against what +Vigano was advocating for.  So he used his ego against him in an attempt to persuade him to move in a positive direction.  +Vigano knows how people work and think, all part of his training as a professional diplomat, and he's put that into action here.

I saw the fruits of his approach in the penultimate video from Taylor Marshall.  Not only did Marshall express sympathy for +Vigano's position, but I watched the livestream chat and found, to my astonishment, that 90-95% of the comments were in favor of +Vigano and against Bergoglio.  My wife told me that today Marshall said that it was 85% in favor of +Vigano (my numbers were just rough guesstimate based on what I saw quickly scroll by).  That is atonishing to take that many conservative Conciliar types and bring them along to where 85% of them support you in your declaration of Bergoglio's non-papacy.  This demonstrates the fruits of +Vigano's brilliant approach here.  +Vigano is actually using Bergoglio's own stated tactics against him.  Tucho publicly stated that Jorge's tactic is gradualism in the hopes of making his changes permanent and unrevokable.  Well, +Vigano is using the same gradualist approach, but to do good instead of evil, to convert souls instead of to destroy them.

Great points, Matthew.  Even if there were a doubtful consecration before V2 that needed to be conditionally rectified and which affected people, such as if the bishop had ordained some priests, who then conferred Sacraments, etc. ... the Church would try to rectify it quietly, providing sanatio for some situations, conditionally ordaining the priests, having them redo the Mass intentions, etc.  Now, there was a situation in the Conciliar Church where some deacon was baptizing invalidly and they had to make a public announcement because they lost track of all the thousands of individuals this clown had invalidly baptized.  So, barring a situation like that, conditionals were generally kept quiet.

But, as you say, who's been affected by +Vigano?  There may be some NO priests out there he ordained, but those likely don't doubt their own validity.  There's no compelling reason here to require some kind of public announcement ... not yet anyway.  I'm sure it'll come eventually, but I believe +Vigano's tactics in trying to convert large numbers of Conciliars to Tradition are responsible for the current delay.  Until then, if you need to know, you can find out from reliable sources, and though I did not personally ask Bishop Williamson, I consider the individuals who did to be very reliable, to the point that I'd have zero problems receiving Sacraments from a hypothetical +Vigano-ordained priest.

This Tweet here speaks to my post above about the "+Vigano Effect", or perhaps you can call it the "Bergoglio Effect" (which +Vigano is then taking advantage of in an attempt to bring as many as possible to Tradition).

Bergoglio is clearly relying upon the old "bully conservative Catholics with a papal authority that I don't even believe in and don't impose on anyone else" but has failed to realize that it's wearing thin even with those Catholic who still believe in and respect papal authority in principle, give his hypocritical non-use of the same to punish the actual heretics and perverts.  He's subverted papal authority and so has dulled the blade that his predecessors used to keep people ensnared in the Conciliar Church.



B

I'm fairly certain that I know why.  If you've followed +Vigano since he started out as a Traditional Catholic about 4 years ago now, and I know you have, you'll realize that he takes everything one step at a time.  He realizes that he's a late-comer to Tradition and has been wondering how he can make a difference, attempting to discern why God called him so late to Tradition.  I believe he sees it as his mission from God to open the eyes of the Conciliar conservatives, and in order to accomplish that, he can't lose them too fast.  Had it come out immediately that +Vigano holds NO Orders to be doubful, and as an SV who denounces all the Popes since Pius XII, he would have lost his following among Trad, Inc. and the conservative types very quickly, thus defeting his mission.

The end does not justify the means.  We can't compromise the sacraments (i.e. minimize the dangers of the new rites) in order to "hope" to convert indulters.  We must speak the Truth and speak it plainly...just like he did in calling out Francis as a non-pope.  If he can get excommunicated for schism, but he can't admit he may have been a fake bishop and he needed a conditional consecration...what kind of man is this? 

So he's been taking it one step at a time, where each little step is palatable to the Conciliar conservatives and doesn't lose them completely, so then with each step he can bring along to the following step any who remain with him after the previous step.  Bishop Sanborn, in his last video, said he may have been "impatient" and realizes that +Vigano is taking his time so that he doesn't "shock people".  And it's not just about shocking them, but about losing them too quickly. 

He just called the pope a fake pope.  He just got excommunicated.  I'd say "all his cards are on the table".  What other "little steps" are left?  He's gone all the way, man.

As you yourself cited, he's clearly IMPLICITLY laid out his next step in the last declaration, namely, that he's going to explicitly call Roncalli/Montini - Ratzinger Antipopes as well.  

He's already called them heretics.  Going the "antipope" route is not that big of a deal.  He's already let the cat out of the bag.

+Vigano is a brilliant man, and he knows what he's doing, and what he's doing is very deliberate, in the manner of a teacher trying to convert huge masses to Tradition, without losing them.  So what good would he have done if he had immediately come out guns-a-blazing to excoriate the entire Conciliar establishment?  He would have been preaching to the choir, the existing Trads, but would have exstinguished all hope of making new Traditional Catholic converts.  Which is more important, to allow some Trads and dogmatic SVs to thump their chests, or to convert more souls to Tradition?  It's the same approach he took with Trump.  He knows Trump's psychological makeup and knows that coming out and excoriating Trump would have had no effect other than to have him double down against what +Vigano was advocating for.  So he used his ego against him in an attempt to persuade him to move in a positive direction.  +Vigano knows how people work and think, all part of his training as a professional diplomat, and he's put that into action here.

This is all conjecture.  He's already said that V2 was heretical.  This includes the new rites, implicitly.  The novus ordoites and indulters know this.  There's no "bombshell" left for him to drop.  He's said everything, basically.

Because after the (low key) conditional consecration, that chance of ACTUALLY BEING A BISHOP goes up to 100%. So what are you left with? A public ceremony announcing him as a bishop, a semi-public ceremony to correct any defect(s) in the first ceremony. In short, you have a man consecrated bishop, everyone knows is a bishop (due to a very public ceremony years ago), and he really is a bishop.

You do realize that a conditional sacrament does NOT retroactively go back in time and provide graces/sacraments IN THE PAST?  It doesn't work that way.  A conditional sacrament works on THAT DAY and going forward.  Everything that happened in the past, when you were doubtful, is STILL doubtful.