Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: SeanJohnson on October 07, 2023, 09:05:03 PM
-
Dear Friends and Benefactors,
at the beginning of the month dedicated to Our Lady, it is normal to recommend the daily recitation of the Holy Rosary, which is a most powerful weapon against Satan and his servants. And yet, this month of October sees us called to an extra spiritual commitment, due to a great threat hanging over the current Synod, where a conventicle of corrupt and heretical Prelates is pushing through the blessing of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ couples, the admission of women to Holy Orders, synodality in Church government, and the absolution of those who have no intention of sinning any more. The methods used in this Synod - after the experience of the previous ones - are identical to those adopted by communist regimes, experts in the manipulation of consensus. Added to this, in a disturbing crescendo, are new docuмents by Bergoglio, in which he abuses the authority granted to him to impose the new dogmas of the globalist agenda, even venturing into scientific matters over which he has no magisterial power; on the other hand, Faith and Morals are systematically "deconstructed", separating the enunciation of doctrine from pastoral practice. We well believe that the Holy Spirit guards the Catholic Church and that the Lord guides her as the Head of the Mystical Body; but we also know that she is today eclipsed by a sect of heretics and corrupts who have no intention of giving up their subversive aims: to demolish the Church from within, turning her into the handmaiden of the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr. This attack is the work of an apostate and traitorous Hierarchy, usurping the authority Our Lord gave His Ministers to save souls, not to damn them. I spoke about this recently in regard to Bergoglio’s lack of consent in assuming the Papacy (here) and I trust that these arguments will find consensus among my Brothers in the Episcopate, so that the subversive attack of the Santa Marta sect will finally be revealed. I urge you, dear Friends, to prepare yourselves for this spiritual combat by training in the gymnasium of Faith, first of all with the powerful prayer of the Rosary, and together with it by reciting throughout the month of October the prayer to Christ the King and High Priest, to implore defence and protection for the Holy Church in these hours of confusion and darkness. I would like to express my profound and heartfelt thanks for the generosity with which many of you support our activities, and in particular the project for the Monastic Village for the Benedictine nuns of Pienza. Beyond the (few) more conspicuous donations, I cannot fail to notice many small offerings that come to Exsurge Domine from people for whom - especially in this time of global economic crisis - even a simple almsgiving represents a sacrifice particularly pleasing in the eyes of God: to all of you, who give from the heart, I respond with heartfelt gratitude. I would like you to know that every first Friday and Saturday of the month I celebrate the Holy Sacrifice according to the intentions of the Friends and Benefactors of Exsurge Domine. You are also remembered in the prayers by the priests, religious men and women whom we help through your charity.
[color=var(--link-fg, #1a73e8)]exsurgedomine.it/…ntent/uploads/2023/06/Newsletter-ED-231007-eng.pdf[/color] (https://gloria.tv/go/OA34UGOgVV5gMSVYRvgz6yW708e035XzoTXBSFgMfpCAJpfaV4amLbDRW63iqWuFltZSPtEYDFaOZUKB1MxubwrfyGVV9RazldlUzMGMtyO3DghbZGvfRSNhP3aWMZhpyYnJ7YzjGJZQsKQBDO)
-
+Vigano:
We well believe that the Holy Spirit guards the Catholic Church and that the Lord guides her as the Head of the Mystical Body; but we also know that she is today eclipsed by a sect of heretics and corrupts who have no intention of giving up their subversive aims: to demolish the Church from within, turning her into the handmaiden of the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr. This attack is the work of an apostate and traitorous Hierarchy, usurping the authority Our Lord gave His Ministers to save souls, not to damn them.
(https://media1.giphy.com/media/xDpB3lRInUYla/giphy.gif)
-
I spoke about this recently in regard to Bergoglio’s lack of consent in assuming the Papacy (here) and I trust that these arguments will find consensus among my Brothers in the Episcopate, so that the subversive attack of the Santa Marta sect will finally be revealed.
.
The subversive attack of the what?! What about Vatican 2? What about Paul VI? What about modernist heretics? Isn't the subversive attack on the Church coming from those? And it's great to speak about Bergoglio's "lack of consent" (I don't agree with the notion per se, but I'll take it for now), but don't the predecessors of Bergoglio fall under the same problem? This is the problem with Vigano. If he thinks the subversive attack is coming from Bergoglio and something called the Santa Marta, then he really doesn't understand what's going on at all.
This is a long ways from Abp. Lefebvre denouncing the "bastard Mass" and "bastard sacraments", or calling Paul VI the antichrist. Wake me up when Vigano starts making statements like that. :sleep:
-
:facepalm: He’s talking about today, now, what’s going on presently at the Synod.
-
It's much more likely that whoever is behind Vigano is just using this to further weaken, divide and further discredit the Catholic Church. The dogmatic sedevacantists on the board might think this is a great thing, but note that the enemy never seems to go after the sedevacantist groups. What the enemy focuses all of its attention on are the visible institutions and organs of the Catholic Church. Vigano uses the same rhetoric from the Russian propaganda and disinformation, and joins his voice with various others on the same spectrum to attack the Church from without and organize the Catholics of the Dissident Right as anti anti-communists analogous to Antifa on the Left.
What the above means is that they are attacking from within and without and Vigano is not really doing anything to convince the majority of anything, but he is accomplishing someone's goals. Considering current events, I would wager it is tied into the universal discrediting of religion in preparation for the coming system, which is being built with the help of the likes of Biden, Putin, Xi and other world leaders in lockstep.
-
It's much more likely that whoever is behind Vigano is just using this to further weaken, divide and further discredit the Catholic Church. The dogmatic sedevacantists on the board might think this is a great thing, but note that the enemy never seems to go after the sedevacantist groups. What the enemy focuses all of its attention on are the visible institutions and organs of the Catholic Church. Vigano uses the same rhetoric from the Russian propaganda and disinformation, and joins his voice with various others on the same spectrum to attack the Church from without and organize the Catholics of the Dissident Right as anti anti-communists analogous to Antifa on the Left.
What the above means is that they are attacking from within and without and Vigano is not really doing anything to convince the majority of anything, but he is accomplishing someone's goals. Considering current events, I would wager it is tied into the universal discrediting of religion in preparation for the coming system, which is being built with the help of the likes of Biden, Putin, Xi and other world leaders in lockstep.
The hierarchy of the Catholic Church was already dismantled at VII when 99% of them declared no need for the First Commandment or the sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus.
They left and started a new church where "no Jesus is necessary" since we all go to Heaven now. smh
If that wasn't the Great Apostasy then what on earth could it be?
That doesn't mean the gates of Hell prevailed since the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Faith is still here.
But it's NOT just not a side chapel in the Pantheon of gods Chrislamic church of the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr lead by the demon worshipper in Rome.
Now Vigano has named on several occasions three Katechons (that which holds back the Antichrist):
1. Benedict (who he declared went to Heaven without purgatory :facepalm:)
2. Trump (Vax Daddy holding back the deep state. LOL :clown::laugh1:)
3. Moscow (the heretical sect there is our "messiah")
His narrative is that the Church was destroyed by the "deep Church" when they took down the "oh so conservative Benedict" and now we must look to the
"Third Rome"-----Moscow. (Dugin also calls Moscow the Katechon)
Plus Vigano has prophesized that Trump will negotiate a peace deal with Putin.
So it appears that the plan is for WWIII to break out and
Vigano could possibly be the fake 3rd secret "bishop in white"
(written by Benedict)
who will have to flee Rome
and where oh where will he go??
Why Moscow of course.
That's where he will likely bring forth the great "Phoenix from the ashes"
the Antichrist
deceiving the elect. (Jorge hasn't deceived them.)
Throw in a bluebeam dancing of the sun event for good measure
oh and a fake Great Monarch to liberate Rome.
Yep, now that would deceive the elect.
Who knows?? Just looking at the clues. LOL :cowboy:
Time will tell.
It's entertaining anyway...:popcorn:
-
.
The subversive attack of the what?! What about Vatican 2? What about Paul VI? What about modernist heretics? Isn't the subversive attack on the Church coming from those? And it's great to speak about Bergoglio's "lack of consent" (I don't agree with the notion per se, but I'll take it for now), but don't the predecessors of Bergoglio fall under the same problem? This is the problem with Vigano. If he thinks the subversive attack is coming from Bergoglio and something called the Santa Marta, then he really doesn't understand what's going on at all.
This is a long ways from Abp. Lefebvre denouncing the "bastard Mass" and "bastard sacraments", or calling Paul VI the antichrist. Wake me up when Vigano starts making statements like that. :sleep:
I hear you. Maybe someone (Lad? Sean?) can post a thread with Vigano's comments specifically regarding Vatican II/previous popes. This way we can really see what he has said on that topic.
-
I hear you. Maybe someone (Lad? Sean?) can post a thread with Vigano's comments specifically regarding Vatican II/previous popes. This way we can really see what he has said on that topic.
Here’s a great one he wrote against Benedict XVI:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/abp-vigano-pope-emeritus-benedict-xvi-is-wrong-to-praise-the-diabolical-revolution-of-vatican-ii/
-
It's much more likely that whoever is behind Vigano is just using this to further weaken, divide and further discredit the Catholic Church.
So, this is the first attempt at establishing a cui bono for the +Vigano conspiracy theory. Unfortunately, though, it's a vague notion that it would "discredit" the Church ... without any adequate explanation about HOW it would "discredit" the Church.
In case you haven't noticed, it's Bergoglio who has been discrediting the Church and declaring him a heretical non-pope is the only way to salvage the reputation of the Church and the papacy. If you've been around on internet forums, you'd notice how many non-Catholics use Bergoglio to smear the Catholic Church.
But here's another one who despises +Vigano for ulterior motives, namely, because +Vigano spoke the truth about the Ukraine and Russia situation.
-
So, this is the first attempt at establishing a cui bono for the +Vigano conspiracy theory. Unfortunately, though, it's a vague notion that it would "discredit" the Church ... without any adequate explanation about HOW it would "discredit" the Church.
In case you haven't noticed, it's Bergoglio who has been discrediting the Church and declaring him a heretical non-pope is the only way to salvage the reputation of the Church and the papacy. If you've been around on internet forums, you'd notice how many non-Catholics use Bergoglio to smear the Catholic Church.
But here's another one who despises +Vigano for ulterior motives, namely, because +Vigano spoke the truth about the Ukraine and Russia situation.
Bingo!
-
Here’s Vigano calling “Montini” a heretic:
“We have confirmation of this democratic and anti-hierarchical vision of the “conciliar church” above all in its liturgy, in which the ministerial role of the celebrant is almost denied in favor of the “priestly people” theorized by Lumen Gentium and put in black and white in the heretical formulation of art. 7 of the Institutio Generalis of the Montini Missal of 1969: “The Lord’s Supper, or Mass, is the sacred synaxis or assembly of the people of God, presided over by the priest, to celebrate the Lord’s memorial. Christ’s promise therefore applies eminently to this local assembly of Holy Church: ‘Where two or three are gathered in my name, I am in the midst of them’ (Mt 18: 20).” What is this, if not self-referentiality to the point of modifying the very definition of the Mass along the lines of that “spirit of the Council” and in contradiction with the dogmatic Canons of the Council of Trent and of the entire Magisterium prior to Vatican II?“
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/abp-vigano-the-post-vatican-ii-church-has-almost-entirely-eclipsed-the-church-of-christ/
-
Here’s Vigano calling “Montini” a heretic:
“We have confirmation of this democratic and anti-hierarchical vision of the “conciliar church” above all in its liturgy, in which the ministerial role of the celebrant is almost denied in favor of the “priestly people” theorized by Lumen Gentium and put in black and white in the heretical formulation of art. 7 of the Institutio Generalis of the Montini Missal of 1969: “The Lord’s Supper, or Mass, is the sacred synaxis or assembly of the people of God, presided over by the priest, to celebrate the Lord’s memorial. Christ’s promise therefore applies eminently to this local assembly of Holy Church: ‘Where two or three are gathered in my name, I am in the midst of them’ (Mt 18: 20).” What is this, if not self-referentiality to the point of modifying the very definition of the Mass along the lines of that “spirit of the Council” and in contradiction with the dogmatic Canons of the Council of Trent and of the entire Magisterium prior to Vatican II?“
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/abp-vigano-the-post-vatican-ii-church-has-almost-entirely-eclipsed-the-church-of-christ/
This is very good, but he didn’t call Montini a heretic.
-
Here’s one where he explicitly blames all the conciliar popes:
“It’s true that this situation is a hapax, a case that in itself has never been seen in the history of the Church; but if this applies to the papacy – in a crescendo from Roncalli to Bergoglio – I do not see why it could not apply for Vatican II, which precisely thanks to the recent popes has set itself as an event in itself, and as such has been used by its proponents?”
https://insidethevatican.com/news/newsflash/letter-21-monday-august-10-2020-again-the-council/
-
Here’s one where he explicitly blames all the conciliar popes:
“It’s true that this situation is a hapax, a case that in itself has never been seen in the history of the Church; but if this applies to the papacy – in a crescendo from Roncalli to Bergoglio – I do not see why it could not apply for Vatican II, which precisely thanks to the recent popes has set itself as an event in itself, and as such has been used by its proponents?”
https://insidethevatican.com/news/newsflash/letter-21-monday-august-10-2020-again-the-council/
That is precisely my point: Bergoglio an antipope - page 9 - Crisis in the Church - Catholic Info (cathinfo.com)
T (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/bergoglio-an-antipope/msg906919/#msg906919)his is an end time phenomenon that makes all this arguing about "the pope is not pope" and the "Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church" a waste of time. And I do understand that, if true, the endless debates here on those issues would cease . . . if others here adopted that view, 90% of the threads, the discussion, would disappear. There'd be a lot of twiddling of thumbs without discussions on those and related topics. So I get it . . . what would be the fun of that?
But Scripture forecasts these days. There are "four horns" - I don't take the number literally; it means a full or complete plurality of the instant group - that rise out of the beast, and Bergolio may be the last, the "false prophet" or "little horn," of the beast's horns. Daniel 7:7-8, Daniel 8:8-9, Daniel 11:21 ("the one despised"), Apocalypse 13.
In any event, the time will be like no other, even with pope(s) who are not popes, bishops who are not bishops . . . those of Israel that are not Israelites. Rom. 9:6. But even then, as odd as that may seem, how strange, even then it is "Not as though the word of God has miscarried." Id.
Matthew 24:21 For there shall be then great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, neither shall be.
Yes, even pope(s) who are not popes, etc.
-
The dogmatic sedevacantists on the board might think this is a great thing ...
Again, you just make this up. If you've been following the debate here on CI, you would have noticed that it's predominantly the "dogmatic sedevacantists" who are the most hostile to +Vigano. Apart from them, you have Meg, who despises all things sedevacantist and Miser because he said a good word or two about Trump here or there, and now you because of what he said about the war in Ukraine. But, no, by and large, the dogmatic SVs are not "on board."
You'll find that Sean and I tend to be +Vigano's strongest supporters here, and Sean is squarely R&R, while I am anti-dogmatic-SV and consider myself to be in the middle, a sedeprivationist/impoundist or sede-doubtist. For me, the primary consideration is in fact, as you said, the reputation of the Church. So it's precisely the opposite of what you claim. Protestants are using the Bergoglio "pontificate" to have a field day in smearing the Church, on account of Jorge's promotion of sodomy, his religious indifferentism (I've seen Prots call him a heretic for denying the necessity of faith in Christ for salvation), his promotion of the globalist agenda, climate change nonsense, the jab, etc. So it's Bergoglio who's bringing disgrace upon the papacy ... and not +Vigano. In fact, when I've argued with Prots online who are using Bergoglio to attack the Catholic Church, I simply respond by saying that Bergoglio is not a Catholic pope but an infiltrator who usurped the papacy.
-
That is precisely my point: Bergoglio an antipope - page 9 - Crisis in the Church - Catholic Info (cathinfo.com)
T (https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/bergoglio-an-antipope/msg906919/#msg906919)his is an end time phenomenon that makes all this arguing about "the pope is not pope" and the "Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church" a waste of time. And I do understand that, if true, the endless debates here on those issues would cease . . . if others here adopted that view, 90% of the threads, the discussion, would disappear. There'd be a lot of twiddling of thumbs without discussions on those and related topics. So I get it . . . what would be the fun of that
There would be a twiddling of the thumbs for awhile, if the topics regarding "the pope is not the pope" and "the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church" stopped being discussed. But after awhile, maybe, possibly, we could just discuss actual relevant topics that actually affect trads. However, the sedevacantists bring a lot of traffic to the forum, and the forum might go kaput without them, since there aren't that many non-sedevacantists now.
Though I do remember how fun the old Angelqueen forum was, since sedevacantism wasn't allowed to be discussed. Certainly there were other good topics to discuss. But of course that forum went belly-up. And they seemed to go along with the new orientation of the SSPX just before that happened.
-
Though I do remember how fun the old Angelqueen forum was, since sedevacantism wasn't allowed to be discussed.
Sedevacantism being censored is a "good thing" ... when it happens to be the truth. I look forward to the day, a day that +Lefebvre himself anticipated, where the Church is restored and then declares that the V2 papal claimants were Antipopes, so you can be put to the shame that you deserve for opposing the truth. Your entire time here you have not presented a single substantive argument about why sedevacantism is wrong, and your aversion to it is 100% emotional, not 99.9% but 100% emotional. It's based on absolutely nothing else.
-
sedevacantism wasn't allowed to be discussed.
But of course that forum went belly-up.
And they seemed to go along with the new orientation of the SSPX just before that happened.
What a coincidence :laugh1: three totally unrelated things.
-
What a coincidence :laugh1: three totally unrelated things.
Yeah, I was going to point this out. Evidently the anti-sedevacantists can't keep a forum alive. And also that anti-sedevacantists get inexorably drawn toward the Conciliar Church.
-
Sedevacantism being censored is a "good thing" ... when it happens to be the truth. I look forward to the day, a day that +Lefebvre himself anticipated, where the Church is restored and then declares that the V2 papal claimants were Antipopes, so you can be put to the shame that you deserve for opposing the truth. Your entire time here you have not presented a single substantive argument about why sedevacantism is wrong, and your aversion to it is 100% emotional, not 99.9% but 100% emotional. It's based on absolutely nothing else.
I'm not as emotional as you are Lad. You do seem to have an emotional attachment to your version of sedevacantism, which is an illusion. But....whatever floats your boat, ya know?
Also, if this forum were like the old Angelqueen forum, some of the forum members would have taken the time to go over and analyze the current "synod" docuмents, to see how it would affect the conciliar church, because they cared about such things. Not here, of course.
-
Yeah, I was going to point this out. Evidently the anti-sedevacantists can't keep a forum alive. And also that anti-sedevacantists get inexorably drawn toward the Conciliar Church.
True. Once they (SV's) take over a forum, it's game over for anything truly relevant to trads being discussed. But that how the sedes want it, that that's how it's going to be.
-
True. Once they (SV's) take over a forum, it's game over for anything truly relevant to trads being discussed. But that how the sedes want it, that that's how it's going to be.
You still fail to see the irony of how an anti-sv forum went defunct because there was just so much activity there from "anything truly relevant to trads".
-
You still fail to see the irony of how an anti-sv forum went defunct because there was just so much activity there from "anything truly relevant to trads".
Well, I don't know why, exactly, that the old AQ forum went belly-up. I do recall that many forum members left a few years before it went belly-up, because the owner of the forum researched and wrote an extensive analysis on the problems with Malachi Martin, who was quite popular back in the old days. But before that, it was a wonderful forum, with a lot of trads who participated (both SSPX and Indult). They made hilarious fun of all of the crazy antics going on in the New Masses in the conciliar church. And I recall that they would poke fun at Michael Voris and his "cruises," by pretending to have their own Angelqueen cruise, in which a photo of a dilapidated old fishing boat would be shown as the cruise ship. Ah, the good old days!
I may come into some money through an inheritance in a few years, and if I do, I'm going to try to start a forum for non-sedevacantist trads, provided I can find someone who can do the computer stuff. I think it's needed.
-
There would be a twiddling of the thumbs for awhile, if the topics regarding "the pope is not the pope" and "the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church" stopped being discussed. But after awhile, maybe, possibly, we could just discuss actual relevant topics that actually affect trads. However, the sedevacantists bring a lot of traffic to the forum, and the forum might go kaput without them, since there aren't that many non-sedevacantists now.
Though I do remember how fun the old Angelqueen forum was, since sedevacantism wasn't allowed to be discussed. Certainly there were other good topics to discuss. But of course that forum went belly-up. And they seemed to go along with the new orientation of the SSPX just before that happened.
If normal/regular trads can't generate enough traffic or interest in their own forum, why is that the fault of sedevacantists?
What are some of the 'actually relevant topics' you had in mind? It would seem, apparently, that you are alone in thinking they're relevant? Why not start a few threads to get the ball rolling?
-
some of the forum members would have taken the time to go over and analyze the current "synod" docuмents, to see how it would affect the conciliar church, because they cared about such things. Not here, of course.
Meg, feel free to analyze the Synod garbage and report back.
-
Meg, feel free to analyze the Synod garbage and report back.
I for one don't have the time nor the interest to analyze the "Synod". I no more care about anything Jorge's Synod comes up with that the latest proceedings from the "Church of England" or the Eastern Orthodox. Caring about what they say is to give them some respectability that they do not deserve.
-
Here’s a great one he wrote against Benedict XVI:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/abp-vigano-pope-emeritus-benedict-xvi-is-wrong-to-praise-the-diabolical-revolution-of-vatican-ii/
It's good to see that Archbishop Vigano understands the root of the problem being Vatican II without claiming that all the conciliar popes were necessarily antipopes.
-
It's good to see that Archbishop Vigano understands the root of the problem being Vatican II without claiming that all the conciliar popes were necessarily antipopes.
It's just a matter of time. He's not playing to your stupid agenda where you claim that Bergoglio is a heretic for saying that the old covenant was never revoked, but then claim (ludicriously) that Wojtyla and Ratzinger didn't "really mean it" when they said the same thing. In fact, he's hinted at it already when saying the Jorge is merely a symptom and inevitable result of the Conciliar cancer.
-
It's just a matter of time. He's not playing to your stupid agenda where you claim that Bergoglio is a heretic for saying that the old covenant was never revoked, but then claim (ludicriously) that Wojtyla and Ratzinger didn't "really mean it" when they said the same thing. In fact, he's hinted at it already when saying the Jorge is merely a symptom and inevitable result of the Conciliar cancer.
If you are interested, please read Volume II of To Deceive the Elect. Fr. Kramer shows there the difference between what Pope Benedict XVI said about the Old Covenant and what Jorge Bergoglio said about the Old Covenant.
-
Here’s one where he explicitly blames all the conciliar popes:
“It’s true that this situation is a hapax, a case that in itself has never been seen in the history of the Church; but if this applies to the papacy – in a crescendo from Roncalli to Bergoglio – I do not see why it could not apply for Vatican II, which precisely thanks to the recent popes has set itself as an event in itself, and as such has been used by its proponents?”
https://insidethevatican.com/news/newsflash/letter-21-monday-august-10-2020-again-the-council/
.
Thank you, Sean. I retract my statement that Vigano does not attack the post-Vatican antipopes, or Vatican 2 itself. I see now that he has done so. I wish he would focus on this more though. A lot more.
-
I for one don't have the time nor the interest to analyze the "Synod". I no more care about anything Jorge's Synod comes up with that the latest proceedings from the "Church of England" or the Eastern Orthodox. Caring about what they say is to give them some respectability that they do not deserve.
The dimonds will probably do it.
-
So, this is the first attempt at establishing a cui bono for the +Vigano conspiracy theory. Unfortunately, though, it's a vague notion that it would "discredit" the Church ... without any adequate explanation about HOW it would "discredit" the Church.
In case you haven't noticed, it's Bergoglio who has been discrediting the Church and declaring him a heretical non-pope is the only way to salvage the reputation of the Church and the papacy. If you've been around on internet forums, you'd notice how many non-Catholics use Bergoglio to smear the Catholic Church.
But here's another one who despises +Vigano for ulterior motives, namely, because +Vigano spoke the truth about the Ukraine and Russia situation.
Declaring Francis a heretical non-pope would be rejected by the majority of nominal Catholics in the world. While the Novus Ordo is in decline, they still have multiple orders of magnitude of difference in numbers, which absolutely dwarf what the SSPX can offer. Most of them are happy to "recognize and ignore" or to call for someone even more extreme than he is. The echo chambers you inhabit aren't representative of the world at large, and it's evident by how much you post and abuse people on this forum that you are too much in love with your own opinion to remain objective on the topic.
That you think it is a counterpoint to say that "if you've been around on Internet forums, you'd notice how many non-Catholics use Bergoglio to smear the Catholic Church" shows exactly how little you understood of my argument. Did you really not understand, or did you pretend not to? Francis acting the way he does is precisely the point, and the extremist anti anti-Communists supporting Russia rub abrasively from the other side. Obviously none of us know exactly how this is going to play out, but one can make a fair argument that the Communist goal of discrediting religion greatly benefits from the current political climate.
-
Again, you just make this up. If you've been following the debate here on CI, you would have noticed that it's predominantly the "dogmatic sedevacantists" who are the most hostile to +Vigano. Apart from them, you have Meg, who despises all things sedevacantist and Miser because he said a good word or two about Trump here or there, and now you because of what he said about the war in Ukraine. But, no, by and large, the dogmatic SVs are not "on board."
You'll find that Sean and I tend to be +Vigano's strongest supporters here, and Sean is squarely R&R, while I am anti-dogmatic-SV and consider myself to be in the middle, a sedeprivationist/impoundist or sede-doubtist. For me, the primary consideration is in fact, as you said, the reputation of the Church. So it's precisely the opposite of what you claim. Protestants are using the Bergoglio "pontificate" to have a field day in smearing the Church, on account of Jorge's promotion of sodomy, his religious indifferentism (I've seen Prots call him a heretic for denying the necessity of faith in Christ for salvation), his promotion of the globalist agenda, climate change nonsense, the jab, etc. So it's Bergoglio who's bringing disgrace upon the papacy ... and not +Vigano. In fact, when I've argued with Prots online who are using Bergoglio to attack the Catholic Church, I simply respond by saying that Bergoglio is not a Catholic pope but an infiltrator who usurped the papacy.
If we go by the Vigano poll thread, half of the voters maintain a neutral or undecided position. Then there are two other strong contingents, one of which is pro-Vigano and the other which labels him some kind of fraud. I never said anything about the posters who have been debating you (it was a general statement about the board), and I doubt you could accurately represent the individual positions of those in question, either. You can hardly keep the facts straight between different threads on different days, and you hold to numerous falsehoods which are easily verifiable using the history available on CathInfo. I think we can safely disregard this little construct of yours built dishonestly for the sake of refuting me in your own mind.
That you believe the rejection of Francis as a non-Catholic heretic is possible in the current political clime does not mean that "it's precisely the opposite of what you claim." As I wrote in the previous post, these efforts still help in discrediting the Catholic Church and it is doubtful that such an event would even result in a Traditional Catholic pontificate. It's analogous to you attacking the United States and supporting the idea that she and her peoples deserves to be annihilated due to political changes in the last few decades, which still face a great deal of resistance. While it may not be humanely possible to salvage either one, joining in the enemy's efforts to destroy them is just as bad, or worse. What actually needs to be done is what Vigano has failed to do, which is give a name to the enemy (the global organized Communist movement), punish the guilty and protect the innocent.
-
Declaring Francis a heretical non-pope would be rejected by the majority of nominal Catholics in the world.
That's the whole point. They aren't real catholics, so their opinion matters not. Let them leave; they aren't doing themselves (or the Church) any good by retaining the name 'catholic'.
-
That's the whole point. They aren't real catholics, so their opinion matters not. Let them leave; they aren't doing themselves (or the Church) any good by retaining the name 'catholic'.
One day you may very well stand before the judgment seat of Christ and be brought to account for the deceived souls that you abandoned from your Russian Orthodox enclave in the hinterlands of Russia.
-
Your obsession with Russia knows no bounds.
-
That's the whole point. They aren't real catholics, so their opinion matters not. Let them leave; they aren't doing themselves (or the Church) any good by retaining the name 'catholic'.
Sorry to go off topic. Pax, you now hold the sedevacantist position? Does it pertain only to Bergoglio or does it include the other usurpers after 1958 (or 1963)? If this is correct, when did you come to this conclusion?
-
Again, you just make this up. If you've been following the debate here on CI, you would have noticed that it's predominantly the "dogmatic sedevacantists" who are the most hostile to +Vigano. Apart from them, you have Meg, who despises all things sedevacantist and Miser because he said a good word or two about Trump here or there, and now you because of what he said about the war in Ukraine. But, no, by and large, the dogmatic SVs are not "on board."
I know this particular post was in response to dxcat40, but you have on numerous occasions called out the "dogmatic sedevacantists" regarding Vigano. Exactly who are these "dogmatic sedevacantists"? On this board, the term dogmatic sedevacantist has meant someone who thinks one must be sedevacantist to be saved and historically these posters don't make it here. The term doesn't mean those who strongly believe that the sedevacantist position is the correct one. You seem to be using the accusation to label any sedevacantist that doesn't get on board with Vigano/questions Vigano's intentions. The term seems to be used in order to discredit those who aren't on Team Vigano.
-
I know this particular post was in response to dxcat40, but you have on numerous occasions called out the "dogmatic sedevacantists" regarding Vigano. Exactly who are these "dogmatic sedevacantists"?
There are a group of individuals here who maintain that mere belonging to the Conciliar Church makes someone a heretic, making no allowance for material error combined with the fact that no legitimate Church authority has condemned the Conciliar Church, and the adherence to a heretical proposition is not required to call someone in the Novus Ordo a heretic merely for belonging to it. Those are the ones to whom I refer as dogmatic sedevacantists in this context.
-
Your obsession with Russia knows no bounds.
I talk about Communism. Your obsession with Holy Mother Russia, Flat Earth and other dumb cօռspιʀαcιҽs are what is actually limitless. If it's anti-Western then it is OK for you, Lad and other anti anti-Communists.
-
I talk about Communism. Your obsession with Holy Mother Russia, Flat Earth and other dumb cօռspιʀαcιҽs are what is actually limitless. If it's anti-Western then it is OK for you, Lad and other anti anti-Communists.
More of your inane false dilemmas. Nobody's anti-anti-Communist here. That's yet another slander. Because we don't buy into your idiotic nonsense, you declare us anti-anti-Communist and at one point even slandered me as defending the Chicoms (when I've never done anything of the sort). We're just anti-stupidity, that's all.
-
More of your inane false dilemmas. Nobody's anti-anti-Communist here. That's yet another slander. Because we don't buy into your idiotic nonsense, you declare us anti-anti-Communist and at one point even slandered me as defending the Chicoms (when I've never done anything of the sort). We're just anti-stupidity, that's all.
You went soft on the Chicoms but you will never admit it. There is no false dilemma to be found here: the guilty regularly deride anti-Communism and attack the United States using Russian propaganda and disinformation as the basis of their worldview. Correct me if I am wrong here, but you yourself have even praised JFK Jr. and that is exactly the kind of rhetoric I am talking about from you. You are not anti-stupidity, but embrace any stupidity which criticizes and undermines Western Civilization. You and some of your friends have even attacked the concept of Western Civilization and demonized as far as the Greeks.
-
You went soft on the Chicoms but you will never admit it.
It's about time where you should be banned for slander. I've never once gone "soft" on the Chicoms. And there isn't a single anti anti-Communist here. You repeat your malicious slanders against anyone who doesn't buy into your stupidity.
-
Here’s a great one he wrote against Benedict XVI:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/abp-vigano-pope-emeritus-benedict-xvi-is-wrong-to-praise-the-diabolical-revolution-of-vatican-ii/
Thank you for posting these Sean. It might be a good idea to have them all in a separate thread?
-
It's about time where you should be banned for slander. I've never once gone "soft" on the Chicoms. And there isn't a single anti anti-Communist here. You repeat your malicious slanders against anyone who doesn't buy into your stupidity.
Give it up, Lad. Get help. You are just wasting our time. You have these episodes every now and again, but you already told us you were turning over a new leaf. What happened to that? How can anyone trust anything you say when these resolutions don't even last a week?
-
Give it up, Lad. Get help. You are just wasting our time. You have these episodes every now and again, but you already told us you were turning over a new leaf. What happened to that? How can anyone trust anything you say when these resolutions don't even last a week?
I'm not giving it up until you retract your slander that there are "anti anti-Communists" here on CathInfo (there are none) and your slander that I was defending the Chicoms, which I have never once done.
-
dxcat40, would this be you?
https://www.romancatholicimperialist.com/2020/10/archbishop-vigano-corrects-himself-not.html?m=1
-
Sorry to go off topic. Pax, you now hold the sedevacantist position? Does it pertain only to Bergoglio or does it include the other usurpers after 1958 (or 1963)? If this is correct, when did you come to this conclusion?
I was responding to Dxcat's assertion that the majority of nominal catholics would reject any condemnation of Francis (or V2 or the new mass). My point was that the majority of novus ordoites aren't catholics. This is true regardless of sede or non-sede views.
-
I'm not giving it up until you retract your slander that there are "anti anti-Communists" here on CathInfo (there are none) and your slander that I was defending the Chicoms, which I have never once done.
In the first place, it would be libel if what you claim is true. That is still pretty dubious even if it were true, for reasons of the nature of this platform. I also explained why I wrote what I did and a more reasonable person could understand it is not, but you will hold to your errors and double down regardless if your opponent is critical of your views.
-
I was responding to Dxcat's assertion that the majority of nominal catholics would reject any condemnation of Francis (or V2 or the new mass). My point was that the majority of novus ordoites aren't catholics. This is true regardless of sede or non-sede views.
Thanks for the clarification, so I assume you still hold the R&R position.
-
Thanks for the clarification, so I assume you still hold the R&R position.
It's seemed to me that Pax has shifted more toward an impoundist/privationist view of things, but I don't want to speak for him. That's my perception.
-
The hierarchy of the Catholic Church was already dismantled at VII when 99% of them declared no need for the First Commandment or the sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus.
They left and started a new church where "no Jesus is necessary" since we all go to Heaven now. smh
If that wasn't the Great Apostasy then what on earth could it be?
That doesn't mean the gates of Hell prevailed since the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Faith is still here.
But it's NOT just not a side chapel in the Pantheon of gods Chrislamic church of the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr lead by the demon worshipper in Rome.
I didn't respond to this, and I normally don't to this subject, but it is important to note that the Catholic hierarchy cannot simply disappear and that one's submission to the Roman Pontiff is necessary for salvation. How exactly we interpret this, the problems resulting from Vatican II, and adequately respond have been covered ceaselessly on CathInfo. What I wanted to express was that the enemy is not done with the historical institutions managed from the Vatican, but are actively working on them from within and without. The SSPX is another big target and, as we all know, may very well come out even more openly as a subverted institution.
Now Vigano has named on several occasions three Katechons (that which holds back the Antichrist):
1. Benedict (who he declared went to Heaven without purgatory :facepalm:)
2. Trump (Vax Daddy holding back the deep state. LOL :clown::laugh1:)
3. Moscow (the heretical sect there is our "messiah")
His narrative is that the Church was destroyed by the "deep Church" when they took down the "oh so conservative Benedict" and now we must look to the
"Third Rome"-----Moscow. (Dugin also calls Moscow the Katechon)
Plus Vigano has prophesized that Trump will negotiate a peace deal with Putin.
The rest of your post after this quotation is speculative, but this is an important matter to consider: Vigano's eschatology. It seems like most of the active posters want to give him the benefit of the doubt or remain neutral, but I am sure as the war comes nearer we will see more of these end times (or end times-like) predictions were always fraudulent.
-
It's seemed to me that Pax has shifted more toward an impoundist/privationist view of things, but I don't want to speak for him. That's my perception.
Yes. Long ago, I started with R&R, just because that's what I was taught. I didn't put much thought into it.
Once I looked into the whole issue, I started to see similarities between +ABL/"classic sspx R&R", +Guerard des Laurier, Fr Wathen and (now) Fr Chazal. So, impoundest/privationist makes sense to me.
I still think one could make the argument for some kind of R&R, because (legally speaking) I don't see where V2/new mass/any-other-conciliar-changes are binding under pain of sin. I hold this *possibility* because I think God, even amidst this unprecedented crisis, has put limits on what the heretic/anti-pope/non-popes of V2 (whatever you want to label it) can do. Thus, even if one was an novus ordo, or indulter, or sspx, or sede -- they should all come to the same conclusion (if they are of goodwill) -- namely, the conciliar church/popes are not the Catholic Church. And no one is bound to accept these changes -- and there are multiple reasons -- doctrinal, legal, theological, liturgical, etc -- which all point in the same direction. In other words, the papal question could be completely ignored and you can still come to the same conclusion as sedes.