Ho letto le pregevolissime parole di Monsignor Viganò in risposta al Prof. Pasqualucci, parole più che pregevoli, perché la sua è la vera posizione da prendere. Monsignor Viganò è il primo, tra tutti i Vescovi cattolici, a prendere la posizione giusta sulla questione ed è anche più utile alla Chiesa di quanto sia stato Mons. Lefebvre, che non arrivò mai a dire tanto e malgrado ciò riuscì a farsi scomunicare, mettendo in difficoltà tutti gli altri Vescovi che magari avrebbero preso la stessa posizione ma senza arrivare alla disobbedienza alla Santa Sede con la storia delle Ordinαzιoni Vescovili.

E intanto un Vescovo dalla nostra ora c’è: abbiamo un nuovo Atanasio, non ne avevo alcun dubbio. Mons. Livi, prima di morire, mi urlò due volte, a distanza di una settimana una dall’altra:

“Vaticano I sì! Vaticano II no, no, no! Vaticano II via via via! Vaticano I sì: dogma, dogma dogma!”

Mi felicito con Monsignor Viganò per la nettezza della scelta, uguale a quella di Mons. Livi: il Vaticano II va censurato tutto in generale come conciliabolo equivoco e subdolo con grave e colpevole dolo dei suoi Maggiorenti che lo vollero “pastorale” e non dogmatico come era loro preciso, divino e indifferibile dovere, e va censurato in particolare in quei sette capisaldi ereticali che ne contraddistinguono esplicitamente la peccaminosa ereticalità: 1), regalità di Cristo e derivante diritto pubblico della Chiesa; 2), sui diritti dell’unica verità eguagliati a quelli delle mille falsità (dialogo e non insegnamento); 3), sull’ecuмenismo spurio, ipocrita e origine di tutti gli altri errori; 4), sulla libertà religiosa; 5), sulla ecclesiologia; 6), sulla morale matrimoniale e genericamente sessuale; 7), sulla manchevole nozione di Messa e sugli atroci atti derivanti, in primis l’Institutio dell’annientante e super atroce Novus Ordo Missae (v. il mio All’attacco! Cristo vince, pp. 17 e 121).  
Pregare, pregare, pregare! Xto vince!

Prof. Enrico Maria Radaelli

I read the very valuable words of Monsignor Viganò in response to Prof. Pasqualucci, words more than valuable, because his is the true position to take. Monsignor Viganò is the first, among all the Catholic Bishops, to take the right position on the issue and he is also more useful to the Church than Bishop Lefebvre, who never went so far as to say so much and despite this managed to have himself excommunicated, putting in trouble all the other Bishops who might have taken the same position but without arriving at disobedience to the Holy See with the history of the Episcopal ordinations.

And in the meantime there is a Bishop from our time: we have a new Athanasius, I had no doubt. Bishop Livi, before dying, shouted at me twice, one week apart:

"Vatican I yes! Vatican II no, no, no! Vatican II, go, go, go, go, go! Vatican I yes: dogma, dogma, dogma!"

I congratulate Monsignor Viganò for the clarity of the choice, the same as that of Monsignor Livi: Vatican II should be censored in general as an equivocal and devious conciliabulum with serious and guilty intent of his Maggiorenti who wanted it "pastoral" and not dogmatic as it was their precise, divine and unavoidable duty, and should be censored in particular in those seven heretical cornerstones that explicitly distinguish its sinful hereticality: 1), the kingship of Christ and deriving public law of the Church; 2), on the rights of the one truth equal to those of a thousand falsehoods (dialogue and non-teaching); 3), on spurious, hypocritical ecuмenism and the origin of all other errors; 4), on religious freedom; 5), on ecclesiology; 6), on matrimonial and generically sɛҳuąƖ morality; 7), on the lack of the notion of Mass and on the atrocious acts deriving, first of all, from the Institutio of the annihilating and super atrocious Novus Ordo Missae (v. My Attack! Christ Wins, pp. 17 and 121).  
Pray, pray, pray! Xto wins!

Prof. Enrico Maria Radaelli

On 14th of June, Viganò has written another short letter, published on Blog: Chiesa e post concilio. Viganò repeats the idea that it's better to ditch the whole robber council instead of removing single heretical propositions (proposizioni eretiche o che favoriscono l’eresia).

Prof. Enrico Maria Radaelli, a disciple of Romano Amerio, has commented on that letter (blog-post Comment of 15 giugno 2020 19:14). He calls Viganò "the first of all bishops to take the right position" and "more useful than Lefebvre".

Either that or he doesn't want to call any more attention to the Vigano June 9th letter than he has to.  Hard to say why he didn't mention him.  Could also just be because he intended to write the article in broader terms and did not want it necessarily to be viewed as a point-by-point rebuttal of +Vigano.  It really wasn't.  It was really just a re-statement of his original position to which +Vigano was responding.  So, for example, +Vigano disagreed with his example of the traditio instrumentorum as precedent for reforming a Council.  Here +Schneider merely re-states that without refuting +Vigano's objection to it.

The only thing uncomprehensible is, how Viganò can on the one hand admit to having served the Antichrist for 50 years, and on the other hand not figure that that implies that he lost all credibility and should retire in hiding.

On 14th of June, Viganò has written another short letter, published on Blog: Chiesa e post concilio. Viganò repeats the idea that it's better to ditch the whole robber council instead of removing single heretical propositions (proposizioni eretiche o che favoriscono l’eresia).

Prof. Enrico Maria Radaelli, a disciple of Romano Amerio, has commented on that letter (blog-post Comment of 15 giugno 2020 19:14). He calls Viganò "the first of all bishops to take the right position" and "more useful than Lefebvre".