Wow, is it 3030 already? Gracious how those centuries just pass incredibly quickly.

I feel positively ancient now.

Archbishop Vigano uses strong language about Vatican II but I doubt whether he really understands the doctrinal issues involved; he never goes into much detail. What doesn't seem to have got much attention were his heretical opinions about what he called the "sons of light" and "children of the Woman". These apocalyptic phrases have always been understood to mean the Church, but Vigano says it now refers to the majority of mankind.He has subsctribed to the Bible Belt Protestant belief that we are at the end of the world, and the anti-Christ is somewhere between Bill Gates and the Pope. He is openly asking Catholics to surrender their independent political role and jump into bed with anti-Catholic nutters of all kinds, just because they hate Biden and the Pope. The children of the light apparently now means those aligned Trump's way in the upcoming elections.

Then there is The Remnant, which is Vigano's main mouthpiece. It has developed, over several recent issues of its print edition, a new and heretical doctrine about the See of Peter. The Church is no longer built upon the Rock of Peter, but the faith of Peter (just as in the Lutheran doctrine), or even upon all of us "little rocks".
There's much more going on than meets the eye.
Then of course, there's the fact that Vigano has never, ever, mentioned Archbishop Lefebvre, the one who opposed the errors of the Council from the start. Vigano was a fairly contented Vatican II style apparatchik for decades until he fell out with Pope Francis. But hating the Pope does alone not a real traditionalist make...

Yes, and Viganò wants to dump what he himself calls a General Council. He is a manifest heretic. No true Catholic would want to dump a General Council of the Church.

Very few people become sedevacantists overnight.  It's a very shocking conclusion to someone who believed all this time that this was the Church.

Every sedevacantist I know spent some time transitioning through R&R.  Once you realize that the Council was positively defective and unsalvageable, then one must ponder how that fits with the indefectibility of the Church.  +Vigano is still early on his thinking process.  Perhaps some of those in the NO who have criticized him for this stance will cause him to reflect.

Basically, +Vigano's position is similar to that of The Resistance right now, and to Father Chazal in particular, that the entire thing is garbage.  So do you accuse The Resistance also of being manifest heretics?

You and many sedevacantists abuse the term "manifest" heresy and make no room for lack of pertinacity and material error.  Not only the heresy, but also the pertinacity in heresy must be "manifest".  I fail to detect anything pertinacious on the part of +Vigano; he appears to be quite sincere in his desire to keep the Catholic faith.

Yes. The Remnant's heretical views were published in a series of articles under the name Toni McCarthy:
30/4/2020: “Not dependent on a Worldly Hierarchy in times of crisis. As the above Scripture passages clarify, God’s people are not all those who belong to the specific organisation of the Church”.

This ties in with Vigano's heresy that most of mankind are "the children of Light", an Assisi-like ecuмenism if ever there was.Vigano does not believe the Papacy to be among "the children of Light", but members of other religions apparently are, for he believes (Vigano letter to Trump) that most of the world's population are the "children of light" and "offspring of the woman", i.e., the Church. In the Trump letter, Vigano doesn't state the "offspring of the Woman" or "sons of light" is the Catholic Church, yet he says he borrowed these terms from the Bible, where they have always been understood to mean the Church. He now sees most of mankind (but not the institutional Church) engaged in an end-times battle with the sons of the "serpent". This is a Protestant eschatology that Catholics have always rejected.

The Remnant 15/5/2020:  “It is therefore imperative to reconsider a commonly-held interpretation of Christ’s promise of indefectibility…”...
“… one must reason that if Peter, the man, is the rock on which the true Church is built, which appears to be a commonly-held belief, then confused and disheartened Catholics must believe that the gates of hell will not prevail against the errant Church of Vatican II… If, on the other hand, Christ himself is the rock on which the true Church is built – if He promised to built his indefectible Church upon the faith of St. Peter, then He is our living leader.”

31/5/2020:  “… if Christians believe the promise of indefectibility belongs to the chair of Peter, they will surely feel betrayed confused and disheartened… If, on the other hand, one believes that Christ is the rock… and that the living church is composed of all the faithful throughout the ages, one can draw near to the Lord”
The notion that the Rock upon which Christ built his Church is not Peter, but Christ, or the faith of Peter, is a Lutheran interpretation. The Remnant and Vigano need prayers.

As for Vigano hating Pope Francis, where doesn't he speak of the Pope except in terms of contempt? No comparison with Archbishop Lefebvre. Vigano is a Vatican functionary who fell out with Francis. He rarely criticises other Conciliar Popes, and never with contempt. The issue is personal, not doctrinal. Vigano's doctrinal issues are many times worse than those of Pope Francis.

It is troubling that Vigano does not implicate B16 or JP2; both of whom were/are Modernists. Not sure what's up with that.

He implicated them all:

In his various letters he has rejected the Council of John XXIII/Paul VI, the Mass of Paul VI, Assisi and the “excommunication” of Lefebvre under JPII, the hermeneutic of continuity of BXVI, and the entire counterfeit church all of them established.

He’s harder on Francis because as he explains in his June 10 letter, there has been an acceleration of the revolution under his pontificate.

Vigano, in the same breath he praises the SSPX and Archbishop Lefebvre, refutes their position of loyalty to the Papacy. He tries to implicate Bishop Tissier de Mallerais in his Protestantism. Vigano's next move: to start attacking the SSPX for continuing to be members of the Church he clearly has rejected (his latest letter makes it too clear he does not accept the legitimacy of the Papacy of today).

Here's Bishop Tissier de Mallerais in an interview he have to La Porte Latine, published by the US district of the SSPX on its online news bulletin, 25/3/2016:

"It was this devotion, this respect for the popes, not for their person, but because of their function, that always kept Marcel Lefebvre from any offensive reaction or words against the conciliar popes. And it was the consideration of the permanence of the supreme pontifical function under the errors of these equivocal popes that kept him from falling into sedevacantism, that error of those who, rightly scandalized by the errors of these pontiffs, wrongly conclude that they have lost their function of pope. He continued to go to Rome, to visit the liberal or modernist prelates, “to try to convert them,” he would say, or at least to get them “to tolerate us at least” and again to recognize canonically the Priestly Society of St. Pius X (after its supposed suppression on May 6, 1975), and to “recognize us as we are”, he used to say. Those were his politics with Rome for 15 years: from the supposed "suppression" of the Society in 1975 until his death in 1991."