[SeanJohnson]

Vigano is a lot like Trump and says whatever alienated Catholics would like to hear, but has very little of substance to show for himself and it gets even worse if you look into his history. Much of the rest of the arguments are about as useful as Siri Theory: they're not. Endless speculation, new divisions and ever-shifting goal posts while Francis continues his campaign without any real opposition. Trads splitting from one another, arguing on the Internet and mouthing support for the open enemies of the West really only helps the Revolution's attempts to discredit and undermine what is left of the Catholic Church's authority in the world.

🤢😂🤦🏼

[Kazimierz]

+Vigano is like Theoden in this scene.  For a long time he was under the spell (power) of the Power of Darkness, and he was exorcised.  Next we hope for the scene that begins at the 2:05 mark in this clip.


And then eventually on the Three Days of Darkness, the forces of the "Ghost Army" (Dead Men of Dunharrow) arrive to annihilate the enemy.

Appreciate we does the LOTR analogy.

to really stretch the metaphor….

The ConciLIAR church is the Ring that must be unmade.

is Menzingen Isengard? Certainly B Fellay seeks to make himself a power like Saruman. 

As in the Tale of The Ring, it is ultimately God who will bring ultimate victory and the Restoration of the Church. 

[dxcat40]

🤢😂🤦🏼

Yes, yes, Vigano is changing everything. How wonderful! 😂

[dxcat40]

Appreciate we does the LOTR analogy.

to really stretch the metaphor….

The ConciLIAR church is the Ring that must be unmade.

is Menzingen Isengard? Certainly B Fellay seeks to make himself a power like Saruman.

As in the Tale of The Ring, it is ultimately God who will bring ultimate victory and the Restoration of the Church.

The movie was bad and the metaphor is bad. God help any poor person who actually wishes the "Three Days of Darkness" upon us. It is a sign of severe alienation and not grounded in any kind of Catholic sense.

[Yeti]

OK.  But it would seem to me that it would be absolutely necessary that this isn't just a condemnation of Bergoglio, but of ALL the post Vatican II popes and Vatican II.  Otherwise, I don't see all Trads agreeing on the new pope.

.

Of course. I said that emphatically in another thread. That's one of my biggest problems with Vigano, that he only seems to be condemning Bergoglio and not Montini, Wojtyla, etc. This demonstrates that he doesn't really understand the situation.

[Yeti]

The movie [Lord of the Rings] was bad

.

Okay, we've put up with a lot of nonsense from you for a long time, DX, but this tears it!!! Now you've crossed the line. No one disrespects the Lord of the Rings around here.

[dxcat40]

.

Okay, we've put up with a lot of nonsense from you for a long time, DX, but this tears it!!! Now you've crossed the line. No one disrespects the Lord of the Rings around here.

If you have doubts, just watch the three Hobbit movies and think of the degression Jackson took us through 

[Minnesota]

.

Okay, we've put up with a lot of nonsense from you for a long time, DX, but this tears it!!! Now you've crossed the line. No one disrespects the Lord of the Rings around here.

Still haven't seen them, I don't have 3 years free to sit down and watch!

[hollingsworth]

Of course. I said that emphatically in another thread. That's one of my biggest problems with Vigano, that he only seems to be condemning Bergoglio and not Montini, Wojtyla, etc. This demonstrates that he doesn't really understand the situation.

That "he only seems to be condemning Bergoglio," is the operative phrase here.  Francis has gone over the top. The apparent heresies of the other conciliar popes almost pale by comparison, at least by his predecessors' ability to control and manipulate them in the in the mind of the Catholic body politic.  Frank just throws all caution to the wind.  He should just wear a sandwich board declaring, "I am an open and unrepentant enemy of the Church."

[SeanJohnson]

.

Of course. I said that emphatically in another thread. That's one of my biggest problems with Vigano, that he only seems to be condemning Bergoglio and not Montini, Wojtyla, etc. This demonstrates that he doesn't really understand the situation.

I posted several examples of Vigano criticizing the other conciliar popes here:

https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/vigano-letter-to-friends-and-benefactors/msg907330/?topicseen#msg907330

[Ladislaus]

I posted several examples of Vigano criticizing the other conciliar popes here:

https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/vigano-letter-to-friends-and-benefactors/msg907330/?topicseen#msg907330

He's been criticizing the entire Council (said it should be thrown out completely) and all the V2 papal claimants for 3 years now.  And, yes, you've posted multiple examples.  Not only that, but +Vigano emphatically re-emphasized it in his Twitter/X response to Matt that Bergoglio is merely a symptom and inevitable result of the much deeper "Conciliar cancer".

But the haters will hate, and they ignore all yours posts and examples and just keep saying the same thing over and over again.

[Yeti]

He's been criticizing the entire Council (said it should be thrown out completely) and all the V2 papal claimants for 3 years now.  And, yes, you've posted multiple examples.  Not only that, but +Vigano emphatically re-emphasized it in his Twitter/X response to Matt that Bergoglio is merely a symptom and inevitable result of the much deeper "Conciliar cancer".

But the haters will hate, and they ignore all yours posts and examples and just keep saying the same thing over and over again.

.

Yes, I saw Sean's post on the other thread. I retract my statement that Vigano has not condemned Vatican 2 or the predecessors of Bergoglio. I see now that he has done this, but I wish he talked about it a lot more. Frankly, I wish he talked about nothing but Vatican 2, but in any case yes, he has condemned these things.