He didn’t say “mean well” or “good intentioned”, he said “good will”.  Big difference.  The angels at Christmastime said “peace on earth to men of good will”.  So, yes, he’s right.  You and others are just searching for something to whine about.

Speaking of good will (or lack thereof), nice job of skipping over the first paragraph I quoted where NOW indeed used the term "good will". 
  
Let us repeat: It is a very grave error to think that all who are of good will — who work for a living, strive not to hurt anyone, and help the poor — are the spiritual progeny of the Blessed Mother, are the Children of Light, are part of the Kingdom of God. It is heresy! That is the sort of theology one expects to get from “Pope” Francis, but not from a man who has recently been profiling himself as the orthodox antidote to Francis, even to the point of rightly calling into question the Second Vatican Council.

Vigano knows the US is not Catholic but only Protestant, generally speaking.  Thus, “good will” means love of the natural law, which was his main message to POTUS, concerning the fight for pro-life, etc.  Mithrandylan is right - consider the audience of who Viganò was writing to.  He was speaking, generally, of good vs evil, because that’s the battle the US is fighting right now - over the natural law, not over doctrine and not over V2.  

Or do the remarks of Vigano indicate, in his mind, that V2 was a valid ecuмenical council, since "correcting" it would run counter to the Decree Lamentibili? In light of his remarks about it contradicting Scripture etc. regarding religious liberty, that would be a major issue - as I've been suggesting.

I don't think so. Sounds more like it was a crime committed by "the parallel church".

Quote from: NovusOrdoWatch

Let us repeat: It is a very grave error to think that all who are of good will — who work for a living, strive not to hurt anyone, and help the poor — are the spiritual progeny of the Blessed Mother, are the Children of Light, are part of the Kingdom of God. It is heresy! That is the sort of theology one expects to get from “Pope” Francis, but not from a man who has recently been profiling himself as the orthodox antidote to Francis, even to the point of rightly calling into question the Second Vatican Council.
 .....
Vigano’s identification of basically all who mean well with the Children of Light spoken of in the Bible is an utter theological nightmare. We are not talking about a simple gaffe, the mere result of a quibble about a theological nuance. No, this is a huge heresy with tremendous practical repercussions, as it indirectly confirms all good-willed non-Catholics in their errors and promotes a sort of “generic religion of the good-willed” or a “generic Christianity” at best. But that is a false Christianity, because there is only one true Christianity, and that is the Roman Catholic religion, of which “Abp.” Vigano considers himself a representative. Ironically, this Indifferentism promoted by Vigano is one of the core doctrines of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ.

Yes, exactly. How are all men of good-will "Children of the Light" or "offspring of the Woman"?
Viganò writes:

These two sides, which have a Biblical nature, follow the clear separation between the offspring of the Woman and the offspring of the Serpent. On the one hand, there are those who, although they have a thousand defects and weaknesses, are motivated by the desire to do good, to be honest, to raise a family, to engage in work, to give prosperity to their homeland, to help the needy, and, in obedience to the Law of God, to merit the Kingdom of Heaven.

He lumps (or identifies?) the merely good-willed people ("who are the majority"?) with the "offspring of the Woman", who are a minority in Protestant, Mary-indifferent and Mary-hating America.

Viganò makes it seem like "merit[ing] the Kingdom of Heaven" automatically follows from exercising purely natural virtues. This is naturalism, the religion of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, as Pope Leo XIII explains in Humanum Genus.

Americanism, too, is characterized by the "over esteem of natural virtue" (Testem Benevolentiae Nostræ addressed to Cdl. Gibbons).

Did you discover yet
that water is wet?
Go back and check.

Either you did not read the article, or have trouble with literacy. "That dubious website" rosarytotheinterior.com states, on the page linked  

Dear Nadir,

I suggest you comment the OP of Matthew in that recent thread of his, where he is counting energy in kW and not kWh!

I suggest you comment the OP of Matthew in that recent thread of his, where he is counting energy in kW and not kWh!

Yet again, you dismiss an accurate diagnosis of error or ill will as mere nitpicking. Your comments and replies bespeak a closed-mindedness typical of those who believe that review and reflection are tasks only other people need undertake.

You ought to consider changing your screen name to Rash Judgment. You have given us a dozen or so examples of that disorder on this thread alone, and that's just for starters. Furthermore, your patently inadequate comprehension of English words on a page does not entirely exempt you from culpability for your distasteful habit of making unfounded and invariably invidious presumptions that distort and misrepresent the statements of anyone who, thank God, lacks your fervor for the intellectually nonsensical and morally offensive theory of sedevacantism.

Like 2Vermont, with whom you have much in common, you would do well to recall the old maxim that God gave us two eyes, two ears, and one mouth because he wishes us to look and listen fully twice as much as we speak. You and she, alas, are among the many who evidently would claim that typing and speaking are unconnected operations and that because you have ten fingers, it's peachy keen to write ten times as much drivel as you would ever dare utter.

Yes, exactly. How are all men of good-will "Children of the Light" or "offspring of the Woman"?
Viganò writes:He lumps (or identifies?) the merely good-willed people ("who are the majority"?) with the "offspring of the Woman", who are a minority in Protestant, Mary-indifferent and Mary-hating America.

Viganò makes it seem like "merit[ing] the Kingdom of Heaven" automatically follows from exercising purely natural virtues. This is naturalism, the religion of Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ, as Pope Leo XIII explains in Humanum Genus.

Americanism, too, is characterized by the "over esteem of natural virtue" (Testem Benevolentiae Nostræ addressed to Cdl. Gibbons).

Garbage.  Archbishop Vigano reaffirms a number of times the dogma that there is no salvation outside the Church and without Catholic faith.  St. Augustine spoke of there being those outside the Church who belong to God, because the are of good will and are on a trajectory towards him.  Of course, they cannot be saved without entering the ark of salvation.  Did you miss his condemnation of the notion that non-Catholics can be saved?  Certainly even outside the Church there are lines between good and bad, on the natural level, or would you lump a fervent Pro-Lifer together with the most ardent abortionist without any distinction between them?  They're all the same to you?

Did you miss this in the letter?

Numerous practicing Catholics, and perhaps also a majority of Catholic clergy, are today convinced that the Catholic Faith is no longer necessary for eternal salvation;
...
Last Sunday, the Church celebrated the Most Holy Trinity, and in the Breviary it offers us the recitation of the Symbolum Athanasianum, now outlawed by the conciliar liturgy and already reduced to only two occasions in the liturgical reform of 1962. The first words of that now-disappeared Symbolum remain inscribed in letters of gold: “Quicuмque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat Catholicam fidem; quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit, absque dubio in aeternum peribit – Whosoever wishes to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic faith; For unless a person shall have kept this faith whole and inviolate, without doubt he shall eternally perish.”

I don't trust him. He is "intellectually honest" and with "great humility" admitting to have been led astray by bad wolves, and without further ado implicitly excuses himself from having been co-perpetrator for five decades destroying the Church of Our Lord and leading hundreds of millions of sheep astray. May the Lord be clement. But how can He, while Viganò paints himself as a victim? Objective sin has to be repented when the misdeed is finally recognized, even if committed bona fide.

Who cares?

Well, I do care. That's why I said "I don't trust him."