Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: BREAKING: Archbishop Viganò Summoned to Vatican Tribunal on Charge of Schism  (Read 27187 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Catholic Knight

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 872
  • Reputation: +245/-84
  • Gender: Male
SSPX accuses Archbishop Vigano of being a Sedevacantist.  Archbishop Vigano is NOT a Sedevacantist until he unequivocally rejects all popes since John XXIII as true popes.  

https://fsspx.news/en/news/vatican-activates-extrajudicial-proceedings-against-archbishop-vigano-45902

Offline Godefroy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 820
  • Reputation: +945/-80
  • Gender: Male
SSPX accuses Archbishop Vigano of being a Sedevacantist.  Archbishop Vigano is NOT a Sedevacantist until he unequivocally rejects all popes since John XXIII as true popes. 

https://fsspx.news/en/news/vatican-activates-extrajudicial-proceedings-against-archbishop-vigano-45902
The SSPX have all but ignored Mgr Vigano since he came to the news over the McCarrick affair. The SSPX agreed with the WHO and Vatican Covid narrative whilst Mgr Vigano said that the 'vaccine' was a satanic baptism. 

The SSPX which stays silent over the thousands of mass goers who go back and forth from Ecclesia Dei churches, all of a sudden gets into a public fit of morality if Vigano might be sedevacantist.  


Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 15160
  • Reputation: +6239/-924
  • Gender: Male
OK, but he's the only one Bergoglio has charged with schism.  There seems to be a shift happening here.
Ya but he's also basically the only one who has spoken up to the point of making waves.
"But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 13039
  • Reputation: +8256/-2561
  • Gender: Male

Quote
Archbishop Vigano is NOT a Sedevacantist until he unequivocally rejects all popes since John XXIII as true popes.
This is a new one for me.  So a new flavor of Sedeism is born?  A partial-Sede vs full-sede?  :laugh1:

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 47759
  • Reputation: +28254/-5289
  • Gender: Male
This is a new one for me.  So a new flavor of Sedeism is born?  A partial-Sede vs full-sede?  :laugh1:

Those were the desperate words of a Bennyvacantist who thinks that everything was fine with the Church until Bergoglio came along ... refusing to admit that Ratzinger held and taught the same heresies that Bergoglio did, just without being as flamboyant and open about it.


Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 13039
  • Reputation: +8256/-2561
  • Gender: Male
From the new-sspx article...

---

The Accusations Made by the DDF
The decree of summons mentions the charge Viganò will face during the trial. The crime of schism is put forward, because of certain public affirmations negating the elements necessary to maintain communion with the Catholic Church: denial of the legitimacy of Pope Francis; rupture of communion with him; and rejection of the Second Vatican Council.

Following this summons, Viganò published a communiqué, available online, to respond to these accusations. He defends himself in various ways, invoking the doctrinal wanderings of the current pontificate; rejecting neo-modernist errors; and asserting his case compares to that of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, also summoned in his time to the Palace of the former Holy Office .

There is, however, one point which significantly differentiates him from the founder of the Society of Saint Pius X: Archbishop Viganò makes a clear declaration of sedevacantism in his text. In other words, according to him, Pope Francis is not pope.

How does he explain this? Because of a “defect of consent” from Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio when accepting the papacy. That is, according to Viganò, Cardinal Bergoglio considered the papacy as something other than what it really is. He accepted the pontifical office without fully consenting, and this error resulted in the nullity of his acceptance. His pontificate would therefore be that of a place-holder.

Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society he founded have not ventured down that perilous road. 


----

Wow, the new-sspx just butchered +Vigano's rationale and argument for 'non-acceptance'.  They didn't mention a counter-church or the V2 pope's intention to change Catholicism, to build a false new-age religion, etc.  Just wow. 

If you didn't think the new-sspx leadership was controlled, infiltrated and anti-Tradition, you had better WAKE UP!

Offline Godefroy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 820
  • Reputation: +945/-80
  • Gender: Male
From the new-sspx article...

---

The Accusations Made by the DDF
The decree of summons mentions the charge Viganò will face during the trial. The crime of schism is put forward, because of certain public affirmations negating the elements necessary to maintain communion with the Catholic Church: denial of the legitimacy of Pope Francis; rupture of communion with him; and rejection of the Second Vatican Council.

Following this summons, Viganò published a communiqué, available online, to respond to these accusations. He defends himself in various ways, invoking the doctrinal wanderings of the current pontificate; rejecting neo-modernist errors; and asserting his case compares to that of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, also summoned in his time to the Palace of the former Holy Office .

There is, however, one point which significantly differentiates him from the founder of the Society of Saint Pius X: Archbishop Viganò makes a clear declaration of sedevacantism in his text. In other words, according to him, Pope Francis is not pope.

How does he explain this? Because of a “defect of consent” from Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio when accepting the papacy. That is, according to Viganò, Cardinal Bergoglio considered the papacy as something other than what it really is. He accepted the pontifical office without fully consenting, and this error resulted in the nullity of his acceptance. His pontificate would therefore be that of a place-holder.

Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society he founded have not ventured down that perilous road.


----

Wow, the new-sspx just butchered +Vigano's rationale and argument for 'non-acceptance'.  They didn't mention a counter-church or the V2 pope's intention to change Catholicism, to build a false new-age religion, etc.  Just wow. 

If you didn't think the new-sspx leadership was controlled, infiltrated and anti-Tradition, you had better WAKE UP!

The never ending pedophile scandals, and the lack of any publicity about it, is all the marks of an organisation under control, Epstein style.  You can be absolutely certain that when the SSPX does something that really bothers the system, that the press will not hold back, not only on the pedophile priests, but all those who promoted them, protected them, and all those who knew but did nothing. 

They will throw Mgr Vigano under a bus, just as throw all the families of pedophile victims under a bus. This will not end well for them. 




Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 47759
  • Reputation: +28254/-5289
  • Gender: Male
From the new-sspx article...

---

Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society he founded have not ventured down that perilous road.


----

Wow, the new-sspx just butchered +Vigano's rationale and argument for 'non-acceptance'.  They didn't mention a counter-church or the V2 pope's intention to change Catholicism, to build a false new-age religion, etc.  Just wow. 

If you didn't think the new-sspx leadership was controlled, infiltrated and anti-Tradition, you had better WAKE UP!

Instead of supporting +Vigano and his stand for Tradition, neo-SSPX are basically condemning him.  Ridiculous.

Besides, Archbishop Lefebvre died 35 years ago now.  Who knows what how he would have reacted to Bergoglio?  He could very well have come to the same conclusion as +Vigano.  He nearly went SV with regard to Wojtyla at the time of Assisi, and Bergoglio has definitely upped the ante.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 47759
  • Reputation: +28254/-5289
  • Gender: Male
The never ending pedophile scandals, and the lack of any publicity about it, is all the marks of an organisation under control, Epstein style.  You can be absolutely certain that when the SSPX does something that really bothers the system, that the press will not hold back, not only on the pedophile priests, but all those who promoted them, protected them, and all those who knew but did nothing.

They will throw Mgr Vigano under a bus, just as throw all the families of pedophile victims under a bus. This will not end well for them.

Absolutely.  I am convinced that there's no rational explanation for some of the more egregious pedophile-priest coverups by +Fellay, to the point that he's become an accomplice in their crimes ... short of some kind of dirt or other control they have over him.

Offline 2Vermont

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11528
  • Reputation: +6479/-1195
  • Gender: Female
When Bergoglio (or his successor if he dies beforehand) bans the TLM in the conciliar structures, I am convinced that the SSPX will finally be its official, new indult.  Birds of a feather.  It's plain to see for those willing to see.

Offline josefamenendez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5611
  • Reputation: +4217/-292
  • Gender: Female
How ironic Vigano is being charged with schism when there are statues of Martin Luther in the Vatican commissioned by Francis.


Mario Dirksen says Francis can't have it both ways:



Offline Catholic Knight

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 872
  • Reputation: +245/-84
  • Gender: Male
Those were the desperate words of a Bennyvacantist who thinks that everything was fine with the Church until Bergoglio came along ... refusing to admit that Ratzinger held and taught the same heresies that Bergoglio did, just without being as flamboyant and open about it.







Quote
“There are some who make the objection that, ‘If Bergoglio is a heretic as you claim, then so also must Ratzinger be considered a heretic.’ All of them, whether Sedevacantists, or the others who either gullibly believe this Sedevacantist fallacy (such as Catholic Truth Scotland), or knowing that it is a Sedevacantist fallacy, propagate it nevertheless in order to confer the appearance of legitimacy on Bergoglio’s faux pontificate and on the heretical anti-church he seeks to erect, and the Masonic agenda he seeks to implement — all of them assert this fallacy not so much to prove that Pope Benedict is a heretic, but to support their indefensible position which claims Bergoglio is not a heretic, and that he is a legitimate pope. I say ‘indefensible’ because, as I have shown, Bergoglio asserts heresy that cannot be excused by any mitigating factors or circuмstances, but is of such a nature that whoever would assert it does so evidently with the culpability and dolus of formal heresy. The same cannot be said of Pope Benedict XVI. The indicia against Ratzinger simply do not add up to the evident fact of manifest formal heresy as they do for the heretic Bergoglio, whose formal heresy, as I have explained, is not known by means of a complex judgment process which arrives at a conclusion after a laborious investigation of evidence, but is known as a fact seen to be evidently true based on immediately evident factual evidence.”
Kramer, Paul. On the true and the false pope: The case against Bergoglio (p. 511). Gondolin Press. Kindle Edition.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 47759
  • Reputation: +28254/-5289
  • Gender: Male





Kramer, Paul. On the true and the false pope: The case against Bergoglio (p. 511). Gondolin Press. Kindle Edition.

No your position is ludicrous and comical.  Fr. Kramer's big accusation against Jorge was in denying the Council of Florence.  Wojtyla was the one who invented that doctrine, and Ratzinger repeatedly taught it.

So the absurd Bennyvacantist dopes are trying to judge the internal forum, claiming that Jorge meant it but that Ratzinger really didn't.

You could make yourselves into bigger laughingstocks if you tried.

Offline Godefroy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 820
  • Reputation: +945/-80
  • Gender: Male
When Bergoglio (or his successor if he dies beforehand) bans the TLM in the conciliar structures, I am convinced that the SSPX will finally be its official, new indult.  Birds of a feather.  It's plain to see for those willing to see.

That's becoming very clear. The SSPX controlled from above by the threat of revealing pedophile scandals, and in turn the SSPX controls its faithful through psychological conditioning and the threats of removing your access to schools and sacraments. The whole thing is kept together by no one ever talking about it. 

It seems too much of a coincidence that the French District superior announces new episcopal consecrations, presumably to handle the massive influx of indulters about to join. What are the conditions required to become a bishop in the SSPX? We already have a pretty good idea of what the conditions are to become a Superior General of an entire continent.  

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 47759
  • Reputation: +28254/-5289
  • Gender: Male
Yeah, it'll be curious what happens with SSPX/FSSP when Bergoglio finally eliminates the Tridentine Mass entirely.  I'm guessing they'll carry on as normal, and that the new directive will be a re-ephasis of Traditionis Custodes targetted at the average diocese.

TC -- Ban Tridentine Mass..
Next One -- I meant it.
This New One -- I really meant it.