"If you take the Montinian missal, you will not find explicit heresies in it; but if you compare it with the traditional missal, you will find that the omission of so many prayers composed in defense of revealed Truth was more than enough to make the reformed Mass acceptable even to Lutherans, as they themselves admitted after the promulgation of that fatal and equivocal rite. To confirm this, even the feasts of the Chair of St. Peter in Rome and Antioch have been combined into one, in the name of that cancel culture that the modernist sect adopted in the ecclesiastical sphere well before the woke left appropriated it in the civil sphere."

I asked you in earlier to identify anywhere in Vigano's writings where he goes into the issue of a papal "vacancy" or, now I ask a bit differently, show us where he even entertains the necessity of considering Francis an antipope or non-pope, an issue which for you is essential to retaining the integrity of "Holy Mother Church"? I don't think you'll find it.

In fact, Vigano repeatedly talks of "Pope Bergolio" and recognizes the authority of the Conciliar hierarchy, I guess without (apparently) besmirching and prostituting Holy Mother Church as you say Sean does. Here's just a sample:

Tell that to Vigano. He doesn't bother with the question. He sees the man sitting on the throne; he sees he's evil; and he hopes for the end of the scourge. Comb through his abundant writings and see if you can find him bothering with the question whether Bergolio sitting "on the throne" is truly pope or not, and then come back and quote it for us.





Sorry, he's not distracted with your question of "vacancy." He's dealing with a heretic "on the throne" and an apostate leadership and hierarchy. He has eyes; he can see; and he's not distracted on academic questions of whether their title is legal when their possession is undeniable, and he wants his land and country back. Period.

DR

He will *never* get his land nor his country back *until* he settles the question. There is no authority above the pope, period. He can rant and rave all he wants, but as long as he considers that communist in white as a true pope, he has absolutely no power to do anything.

You are correct that as long as Archbishop Vigano recognizes Jorge Bergoglio as a true pope he cannot go any further because a true pope has supreme jurisdiction over all ecclesiastical matters.

But equally correct is that he's never rejected it either.  I've not read a single affirmation from him that he thinks Bergoglio IS the true pope.  He's called for an investigation, believes the "prelates of the Church" have to make the determination, etc. ... but he clearly has serious doubts about Bergoglio, but is just prescinding from making some kind of statement to that effect, which he seems to believe is not within his rights to do.