It seems like Msgr. Vigano is on a trajectory for "excommunication." I'm wondering how many who support him today will abandon him if this happens (just as many abandoned Msgr. Lefebvre). What he said about the hierarchy today makes me think he hasn't much time left before the Roman Heretic is finally forced to address him.Why do you think this? Are you equating his actions with ABL?
What he said about the hierarchy today
This?
What was this?
Why do you think this? Are you equating his actions with ABL?
This?
https://www.marcotosatti.com/2022/09/21/vigano-la-benedizione-di-coppie-omosessuali-in-belgio-e-eresia/
Excommunicated from what? Francis Church?
Excommunication might mean something if the Consiliar Church was Catholic (after all)..
Right now it can only be a badge of honor.
It seems like Msgr. Vigano is on a trajectory for "excommunication." I'm wondering how many who support him today will abandon him if this happens (just as many abandoned Msgr. Lefebvre). What he said about the hierarchy today makes me think he hasn't much time left before the Roman Heretic is finally forced to address him.
+Vigano's excommuniation, of course, would mean nothing to me, for the same reasons that Pope St. Celestine declared the excommunications of Nestorius to have been null and void (even before Nestorius was formally removed from office) but even in terms of my perception of +Vigano. I doubt it'll happen because the Vatican simply don't want to go out of their way to draw even more attention to +Vigano. It's the same reason that they quietly allowed Bishop de Castro Mayer to continue Tradition in his diocese, and did not remove him ... because they figured that he'll eventually just die and disappear from the scene, and they didn't want to raise a bit stink about it. Outside of Traditional circles, no one had ever heard of him. So whether they do or don't excommunicate him, it would be for tactical reasons and not out of principle. While it might be interesting to read +Vigano's reaction to such a thing, what the Vatican decides to do or not do has no bearing on my perception of him.
This sort of survival effort would have to involve Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Austria, Ireland and traditionalists in France, Spain, Italy, Mexico, etc. The United States and Quebec too. The world seems blind as bats in California but if the right areas wake up maybe there's a chance. This seems like a would-be Lithuanian or Polish Mandate, not Kentucky, since people in Kentucky don't typically have that sort of Catholic background. A Lithuanian Portfolio ...
(https://i.imgur.com/abM6BFH.png)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/mXd8qP3H8OCZ/
What exactly is the excommunicating offense? Can a bishop be excommunicated for calling the Pope a heretic?
...one would expect the leader of the traditional remnant to be a trad.Yeah. I have to say, this has always puzzled me.
Not a career consiliarist who becomes a sudden media convert.
We have to consider the possibility that +ABV is another controlled opposition set-up.For some reason most Trads hope in non Trad clergy to "restore" the Church. That's partially due to the fact that Trad clergy do too. I personally believe that it's up to the Trad clergy to do it. Not sure how but they must. And yet they keep kicking the can down the road.
If Pope Bergy excommunicates him, it’s good theater and will give more notoriety.
Since the hijacking of the Church in 1958, one would expect the leader of the traditional remnant to be a trad.
Not a career consiliarist who becomes a sudden media convert.
We have to consider the possibility that +ABV is another controlled opposition set-up.Vigano detests the vaccine and yet wants the one who insists to this day that the vax is good and wants to go down in history as the "Father of the Vaccine" back in power. Vigano has NEVER called Trump out for this.
If Pope Bergy excommunicates him, it’s good theater and will give more notoriety.
Since the hijacking of the Church in 1958, one would expect the leader of the traditional remnant to be a trad.
Not a career consiliarist who becomes a sudden media convert.
To properly understand Vigano, we must first understand the "balance of powers" as outlined in the US Constitution (not currently being followed) in which the executive branch, the legislative branch and the judicial branch are separate but equal. (Were our founding docuмents being followed, the alphabet police would be smacked down by both the legislative and juducial branches).
If this is clear, it's easy to understand what Vigano said regarding peaceful coexistence of nations, without there being one nation that considers itself superior and legitimized to subjugate the others. (As the US deep state globalists do now.)
Rightly understood, this is the polar opposite of globalism with it's "International Police Force" to enforce the Communist, anti-God "The Great Reset" in which nations exist in name only.
To properly understand Vigano, we must first understand the "balance of powers" as outlined in the US Constitution (not currently being followed) in which the executive branch, the legislative branch and the judicial branch are separate but equal. (Were our founding docuмents being followed, the alphabet police would be smacked down by both the legislative and juducial branches).When has this ever really worked? Do you consider Tammany Hall vs the Society of the Cincinnati to be an example of good early politics? Or was it always meant to be exploited, vindicating the Anti-Federalists? Not to say a Catholic would necessarily want to support them either.
If this is clear, it's easy to understand what Vigano said regarding peaceful coexistence of nations, without there being one nation that considers itself superior and legitimized to subjugate the others. (As the US deep state globalists do now.)Basically he restated part of the Russian state ideology: unilateralism ("one nation") has got to go! Multilateralism is the desired future of the Eurasianists. If he is a neutral observer, why would he push this same message and support Putin? This multilateralism also includes Communist China as one of the poles of influence.
Rightly understood, this is the polar opposite of globalism with it's "International Police Force" to enforce the Communist, anti-God "The Great Reset" in which nations exist in name only.In multilateralism Communist China becomes the military enforcement arm which replaces the United States. That's not to say support Biden and his wicked regime, but the horror of that next new world order is still nothing compared to our miserable present. Destroying the present order is necessary in order to usher in that renewed (global) Red Terror.
A Catholic can't be excommunicated by heretics and apostates.Does it work both ways?
Does it work both ways?
In other words, can someone previously excommunicated (especially prior to VII), have the excommunication lifted by heretics and apostates?
Does Vigano accept Vatican II as an ecuмenical council of the Church and its official teaching?
Does he accept the new "mass" and sacraments as valid?
Does he hold the abomination in the Vatican since at least 1962 is not the Catholic Church?
If not, I don't understand why 62% of supposedly traditional Catholics support him.
If yes, good for him, I hope he sincerely searches for the fullness of truth and saves his soul by leaving the false sect.
Depends on whether you're a sedeprivationist, whether the excommunication was just/valid in the first place, etc. ... and in danger of death any priest can lift excommunications.The question was directed to shimano.
Answer is ... he's not articulated this clearly.His opinion on Russia and Putin, on the other hand, are quite clear. He helps support the antithesis of the West in alternative media rhetoric.
Depends on whether you're a sedeprivationist, whether the excommunication was just/valid in the first place, etc. ... and in danger of death any priest can lift excommunications.We are not to be our own rule-makers.
Does it work both ways?If you have to ask that question, then you're lacking in logic and sobriety which are attributes of Catholic thought. Snap out of your disorientation, but first you must reject what is not Catholic masquerading as "catholic".
In other words, can someone previously excommunicated (especially prior to VII), have the excommunication lifted by heretics and apostates?
If you have to ask that question, then you're lacking in logic and sobriety which are attributes of Catholic thought. Snap out of your disorientation, but first you must reject what is not Catholic masquerading as "catholic".What a cop-out.
Answer is ... he's not articulated this clearly. He's come a hair's breadth from saying that the Holy See if vacant, has referred to Bergoglio as an NWO operative, has in fact never called him Francis, much less Holy Father, but always just Berogoglio. He says that V2 is the work of Masons trying to destroy the Church, and it's fundamentally flawed, to the point of being unsalvageable, that it cannot be corrected but must be pitched entirely. He certainly holds that the NOM is not a Catholic Mass. He's said that it's possible that Bergoglio is not the Pope and that it must be investigated (in the context of Bennyvcantism ... although he's criticized Ratzinger and Wojtyla as well, not something that your typical Bennyvacantists would care to do).I get it that he says a lot of good things but I don't know enough to pinpoint his position. I dislike it very much when people won't articulate their position clearly. If you don't know your position or are afraid to say it then don't speak at all. I would assume Vigano doesn't celebrate the Novus Ordo. So does he offer the TLM to his flock? I heard that he's "in hiding" years ago, whatever that means. In hiding from what? If the Vatican wanted him αssαssιnαtҽd they can do it whether he hides or not.
In short, he's saying pretty much what Archbishop Lefebvre said (and at times is even more emphatic about it). Why did/do the vast majority of Traditional Catholics support Archbishop Lefebvre?
So, he hasn't come out (at least publicly) yet as a sedevacantist. Does that somehow make him less of a Catholic or Traditional Catholic that Archbishop Lefebvre was?
Does it work both ways?No. Heretics and apostates have no jurisdiction to do such a thing, even if they wanted to.
In other words, can someone previously excommunicated (especially prior to VII), have the excommunication lifted by heretics and apostates?
We are not to be our own rule-makers.What hypocrisy. If you reject the new mass, and anything in Vatican 2 that you don't agree with, then you are making your own rules too, epiphany.
What hypocrisy. If you reject the new mass, and anything in Vatican 2 that you don't agree with, then you are making your own rules too, epiphany.No, this is wrong. We reject the NO etc., because we are bound to the previous teachings and laws. We do not make our own rules. It is at least error to insist that no official censure of excommunication is needed when it actually *is* needed, those who insist they can simply decide such matters on their own are the ones who make their own rules.
No, this is wrong. We reject the NO etc., because we are bound to the previous teachings and laws. We do not make our own rules. It is at least error to insist that no official censure of excommunication is needed when it actually *is* needed, those who insist they can simply decide such matters on their own are the ones who make their own rules.No. How is it "making your own rules" for a traditional Catholic priest to absolve someone from excommunication, but it's not "making your own rules" to reject the new Mass? If anything, it takes a higher level of authority to reject the ceremony of the Mass than to pardon someone from excommunication.
Make sense?
No. How is it "making your own rules" for a traditional Catholic priest to absolve someone from excommunication, but it's not "making your own rules" to reject the new Mass? If anything, it takes a higher level of authority to reject the ceremony of the Mass than to pardon someone from excommunication.
The question is, do we accept the authority of the new church or do we not? My answer is a simple "no"; epiphany doesn't seem to know the answer to that question, and neither do you.
Not everyone lives on the Internet. Ordinary people use this forum less often than the loudest users. The common Catholic I've encountered in the DC area has never even heard of Vigano.Non-sequitur.
Non-sequitur.You are quite the character. Did you get to pick or was it assigned to you? I'd like to dub you "Lord Bluff."
Instead of Vigano saying he made a grave error in actively campaigning for the leader of Operation Warpspeed and the "Father of the (depop) Vaccine" he still says to this day he wants Trump back in power.
After over 40,000 American deaths!
Even Alex Jones has called out Trump for being responsible for those deaths and asked him to stop promoting the shots.
Trump refuses and still wants more, more, more deaths. Get those shots people. The vaccine is beautiful! I'm PROUD of it. Put them in your children and babies. More miscarriages, more, more, more!!!
He is a walking death cult.
So Alex Jones has the decency to renounce Trump at this point and no longer support him.
Not Vigano.
He wants Trump back in power.
Desperate people will excuse anything to hold on to their heroes.
Instead of Vigano saying he made a grave error in actively campaigning for the leader of Operation Warpspeed and the "Father of the (depop) Vaccine" he still says to this day he wants Trump back in power.
You keep making stuff up about +Vigano. He simply said that the Ukraine situation would not be as bad if Trump were in office right now (vs. Biden), and the earlier "lavishing of praise on Trump" was a carefully worded letter trying to appeal to Trump's ego to do what's right, while at the same time using the expression that he "dared hope" Trump would be on the side of good.
+Vigano has been one of the most vocal opponents of the jab, but has chosen not to directly criticize Trump about it. That's a prudential judgment, since he knows very well that Trump reacts to any criticism violently due to his fragile ego. He would accomplish nothing by criticizing Trump directly except to have him develop a hostility toward the Church.
Perhaps you have read where St. Thomas states that not only do you have no obligation to correct/rebuke someone if they are not inclined to accept the correction, but you might even have an obligation to refrain from the rebuke if you feel that it would simply make the more antagonistic.
+Vigano is simply exercising prudence regarding the manner in which he addresses Trump.
Miser continues to slander +Vigano as if he were pro-jab, and Incred slanders him simply because he has had associations in the past with someone who belongs to Opus Dei. There are numerous +Vigano-slanderers here on the forum.
I'm not making anything up.He disagrees with you, so it's basically the same thing to him. Nevermind any evidence or concerns to the contrary.
...This is only anecdotal, but I speak to many Catholics who have never even heard of Vigano. You shouldn't overestimate how loud Internet voices are in the real world. Francis is extinguishing the Novus Ordo controlled Latin Masses. The SSPX is still going along its charted course. He put in place over half of the Novus Ordo cardinals. In what way do you imagine Vigano is damaging the Novus Ordo when we can see no real results of that? They have demonstrated that the Right is completely ineffectual, even if people prefer their Latin masses. Preference for the smells-and-bells isn't an indicator of orthodoxy returning.
I see a shepherd who, with nothing more than a poison pen, has knocked the entire conciliar edifice off its axis, such that large sections of it, and chunks of all the aforementioned parties have -to one degree or another- gravitated towards him.
...
1) He is somehow able to get through to conciliarists, and drag them to the right, to varying degrees, and in the process
2) He is dismantling the credibility of conciliarism (just look what Bergoglio has been forced to do in the last couple years to stop the drift toward some flavor of traditionalism).
Was Vigano simply exercising the same "prudence" when he lavished love and praise on someone he knew was
"Archbishop" Vigano called McCarrick (when he knew he was a predatory pervert) "His Eminence" and said he was "very much loved from us all" - 46 second video (https://schismatic-home-aloner.com/archbishop-vigano-called-mccarrick-when-he-knew-he-was-a-predatory-pervert-his-eminence-and-said-he-was-very-much-loved-from-us-all/)
https://schismatic-home-aloner.com/archbishop-vigano-called-mccarrick-when-he-knew-he-was-a-predatory-pervert-his-eminence-and-said-he-was-very-much-loved-from-us-all/
Bombshell.
So, Vigano defenders... your thoughts on this?
Has your support in the Novus Ordo Archlayman wavered a bit?
He disagrees with you, so it's basically the same thing to him. Nevermind any evidence or concerns to the contrary.Agreed!
I'm not making anything up.
Aside from the disreputable website being cited, a sodomite king is still addressed as "Your Majesty," even if no longer "majestic."
A cardinal's title is "Your Eminence," even if no longer "eminent."
Regarding the video itself, it was from May, 2012, which by that time Msgr. Vigano had already been blowing the whistle on McCarrick for 6 years, and trying to have him disciplined. Recall it was only when he became convinced the Vatican was covering up the incident, that he went public (2018).
So for him to have said McCarrick was "beloved by all of us" in 2012 (i.e., before the matter was public, and while he was trying to have McCarrick disciplined) was obviously a perfunctory gesture at a time when he still had hopes the Vatican would do its duty and deal with McCarrick.
Lad presents no evidence. We can safely disregard it as his opinion. Shamefully he accuses Miser Peccator of being a liar while offering his bias as solid proof. News at 11.Exactly! He does it all too frequently. He is a hypocrital heretic spouting his slander on ladsinfo.
Here's the thing:
Some see Jєωs coming out of the woodwork, therefore Msgr. Vigano is controlled by Jєωs.
Some see Opus Dei coming out of the woodwork, therefore, Msgr. Vigano is controlled by Opus Dei.
Some see Msgr. Vigano giving Trump a pass on the vax, and therefore we can't listen to anything he says against the vax.
Some see him not condemning Putin, therefore, he must be in cahoots with Russia.
And whatever your pet positions are (flat/round earth; sedevacantisme, sedeprivationisme, Bennyvacantisme, R&R, indult, or Novus Ordo, episcopal orders, etc.), whatever he isn't doing to promote them, its natural, therefore, to consider he is compromised in some way.
Let me tell you what I see (voicing opinions is what a forum is for; you needn't agree with me):
I see a shepherd who, with nothing more than a poison pen, has knocked the entire conciliar edifice off its axis, such that large sections of it, and chunks of all the aforementioned parties have -to one degree or another- gravitated towards him.
And why?
Because whatever other faults he might possess -objectively, or merely according to our chosen crisis orrientation- the sheep hear the voice of the shepherd in his writings and doctrine.
The only precedent I can think of who was able to unite -in some degree- all the parties under the banner of true doctrine was Msgr. Lefebvre (particularly before 1983).
I am not blind to some of the particular concerns this or that faction has regarding Msgr. Vigano, but from my perspective, whatever truth there may be in these complaints, he possesses the two most important qualities necessary in our time:
1) He is somehow able to get through to conciliarists, and drag them to the right, to varying degrees, and in the process
2) He is dismantling the credibility of conciliarism (just look what Bergoglio has been forced to do in the last couple years to stop the drift toward some flavor of traditionalism).
These are arguably the two qualities most essential for the restoration of tradition, and we will not have a Catholic pope until this happens (i.e., they are prerequisites).
For these reasons, I support him (without being blind to the objections some have about him).
Having him arise on the scene is good for the Church and for souls.
Aside from the disreputable website being cited, a sodomite king is still addressed as "Your Majesty," even if no longer "majestic."Good defense. You convinced me.
A cardinal's title is "Your Eminence," even if no longer "eminent."
Regarding the video itself, it was from May, 2012, which by that time Msgr. Vigano had already been blowing the whistle on McCarrick for 6 years, and trying to have him disciplined. Recall it was only when he became convinced the Vatican was covering up the incident, that he went public (2018).
So for him to have said McCarrick was "beloved by all of us" in 2012 (i.e., before the matter was public, and while he was trying to have McCarrick disciplined) was obviously a perfunctory gesture at a time when he still had hopes the Vatican would do its duty and deal with McCarrick.
Now that you mention it, I don't know the answer to this question either. I think he talked [wrote] about this at one point, but I'm not sure.
And how did Vigano convert? Even the "miraculous marrano", Roy Schoeman has a conversion cover story.
Lad presents no evidence. We can safely disregard it as his opinion. Shamefully he accuses Miser Peccator of being a liar while offering his bias as solid proof. News at 11.
I actually had a theory about how +Vigano converted, which he later confirmed.Can you post that?
When he went into hiding / seclusion after blowing the whistle on the McCarrick situation, he took advantage of the Motu to begin offering the Tridentine Mass. Nothing teaches the faith and the true sensus Catholicus than the Tridentine Mass ... which is why Bergoglio admits that he hates it so much. While +Vigano was alone, offering the Catholic Mass, and having time to reflect about it due to his seclusion, he came to consider the causes of the decay. I'm sure that his thinking was partly motivated by his repugnance for everything Bergoglio stood for. There are many in the Conciliar Church who started to wake up because of Bergoglio.
1) Miser is the one making accusations against +Vigano, and the burden of proof is on her. When you attack someone's character with allegations, the burden of proof is on you to prove it with solid evidence. But that's never stopped you from slandering people.I hope you are stressed and just having a memory lapse, Lad.
2) On other threads, I asked for the evidence, which Miser refused to provide. I then went through looking for anything +Vigano ever said about Trump, pulled the quotes, and showed how he never said anything close to what Miser has been claiming.
So it stands that Miser and you ... slander +Vigano. Admit that you just hate him because he show down your Globohomo propaganda narrative about Ukraine.
So it stands that Miser and you ... slander +Vigano. Admit that you just hate him because he show down your Globohomo propaganda narrative about Ukraine.Wrong. Miser replied to you already. More false accusations from Lad. Are you just that ignorant, blind or are you actually a liar by lumping me in with "Globohomo"? Gaslighting, false accusations, you name it, Lad will do it, but will never get banned while deserving it more than anyone else. He could use a break.