Author Topic: Vigano Unloads Again (Read 3309 times)

SeanJohnson · « **on:** November 09, 2023, 01:12:51 PM »

Hæc est autem scriptura, quæ digesta est:

Mane, Thecel, Phares — Daniel 5:25

(LifeSiteNews) — When Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s latest statement has not yet finished scandalizing the faithful and causing division among pastors, here comes a new one, of the same sign, that opens another wound in the battered body of the Church.

“Answers to some questions from H.E. Bishop José Negri, Bishop of Santo Amaro in Brazil, regarding the participation in the sacrament of baptism and marriage by transgender and homoaffective persons” were recently published, dated October 31, 2023 (an unofficial English translation can be found here).

Beyond the hypocritical definition of “homoaffective persons” – as if one could separate ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ identity from the inherently sinful exercise of sɛҳuąƖity against nature that defines it – this docuмent represents a further departure from Catholic doctrine, not only because of the questions it accepts to answer, not so much because of the answers it formulates, but also and especially because of the effects its media interpretation will have among the faithful; an interpretation that significantly turns out to be consistent with the so-called inductive method theorized by Bergoglio himself in another docuмent on the study of sacred theology (here).

According to this theory – condemned by Pius XII – it is necessary “to start from the different contexts and concrete situations in which people find themselves, letting themselves be seriously challenged by reality, in order to become a discernment of the signs of the times.” It is no coincidence that all the media, as of the release of the docuмent on November 8, headline “Vatican opens to trans and gαys,” “Yes to divorcees as godparents,” “Trans people may be baptized, Vatican breakthrough.”

The docuмent of the dicastery presided over by Tucho Fernández – author of Amoris lætitiæ and Heal Me with Your Mouth, the Art of Kissing – is obviously not moved by pastoral zeal for the souls of those living in habitual and public states of mortal sin to repent and convert, but by a desire to normalize their behavior, by deleting sodomy from the sins that cry out for vengeance in the sight of God, or by leaving its condemnation to theory and in fact admitting those who practice it not only to the sacraments, but also to those functions – such as godfather of baptism and confirmation or best man at weddings – from which the Church has always excluded those who by their conduct of life publicly contradict the teaching of Our Lord. A function that, in the role of godparent, becomes especially eminent. We therefore rule out any possible excuse based on an alleged misunderstanding of Bergoglio’s words, not least because the precedent of “Who am I to judge,” which earned him the cover of LGBT magazine The Advocate (here), had already proved disastrous in its effects. Effects intended then, reiterated with repeated statements and interviews, confirmed with the latest Vatican docuмent.

“Opening the doors a little more” is indeed Bergoglio’s strategy. Those who claim that these unprecedented statements are the result of improvisation and have no repercussions on the ecclesial body are either mistaken or in bad faith. They start from afar – in this case from December 7, 2014 – and demonstrate a methodical planning, a malicious intention, and a stubborn will to harm souls, discredit the Church, and offend the majesty of God.

The attack on the traditional family and the open endorsement of unions and the sinful behaviors of concubinarians, adulterers, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, and transgender people starts from the Synod on the Family, a dress rehearsal for the current Synod on Synodality. It was in conjunction with that assembly that Bergoglio wanted to give an interview to the Argentine daily La Nacion, anticipating the moves that we see him making today and that none of the cardinal’s Dubia have been able to avert.

Quote

What do we do with them [the remarried divorcees], what door can be opened? There is a pastoral concern: then do we go and give them Communion? It is not a solution to give them Communion. That alone is not the solution, the solution is integration. They are not excommunicated. But they cannot be baptismal godparents, they cannot read the readings at Mass, they cannot distribute Communion, they cannot teach catechism, they cannot do seven things, I have the list there. If I tell this, they would seem to be effectively excommunicated! So, open the doors a little more. Why can’t they be godparents? ‘No, look, what testimony are they going to give to the godson?’ The testimony of a man and woman saying, ‘Look, dear, I was wrong, I slipped on this point, but I believe the Lord loves me, I want to follow God, sin has not overcome me, I’m going on.’ But what kind of Christian testimony is this? Or if one of these political crooks we have comes along, corrupt, to be a godfather and is regularly married for the Church, does she accept him? And what testimony does he go and give to his godson? Testimony of corruption?

These words, as annoying in form as they are deceptive in substance, encapsulate Bergoglio’s subversive project, which finds timely confirmation in the latest docuмent of the Vatican dicastery that has replaced in name and functions the already compromised Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; at the head of which has been appointed an individual who makes no secret of his total and absolute identity of views with the Argentine Jesuit, especially in matters of sodomy.

The speciousness of the arguments betrays the absolute irreconcilability between what the Catholic magisterium teaches and what Bergoglio wants to achieve, in execution of the orders given to him by those who got him elected. Let us not forget that among the results to be obtained by removing Benedict XVI and promoting a “springtime of the Church,” John Podesta’s emails listed precisely a change in morality with the introduction of “gender equality,” a hypocritical euphemism behind which the U.N. Agenda 2030 hides the normalization of transsɛҳuąƖism, sodomy, and pedophilia, as well as the destruction by divorce of the natural family composed of man and woman.

This would be enough, in the eyes of an honest and righteous person, to avoid with the utmost care any slightest variation – even disciplinary – on these issues that should see the Catholic Church and the globalist world on diametrically opposed and irreconcilable positions. Therefore, if a “pope” – in an expression of the most exasperated progressivism and appreciated as such by the historical enemies of the Church – decides to open the Overton window on the condemnation of sodomy, concubinage, and transsɛҳuąƖism, he does so not only with good reason, but with the sole purpose of openly contradicting the magisterium and subverting in its essence the mission of the hierarchy.

This “opening the doors a little more,” because according to Bergoglio “the solution is integration,” is a declaration of intent nine years ago that today finds timely fulfillment, in the astonished silence of the Sacred College and the bishops, indeed with their substantial approval. For it is easy to please the powerful of the earth, those who maneuver governments and even the leadership of the hierarchy to achieve their criminal ends. Much less easy to face with faith and with courage the bonum certamen that the Church has always fought against the prince of this world, to proudly affirm the Gospel of Christ and face martyrdom to defend what He has commanded His pastors to faithfully teach.

A serious analysis of the docuмent of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith cannot and should not limit itself to the refutation of individual heretical propositions, because it would end up pandering to the devious method by which they were conceived and drafted: on the contrary, it is necessary to consider the immediate and long-term effects, taking into account how the Responses stand in relation to other previous statements and especially to the mens that steers them toward a single, very clear and unequivocal direction.

Bergoglio’s statement in the interview with Elisabetta Piqué, “The solution is integration,” is revealing of this wilful and subversive mens, which makes its author not only gravely responsible before God for the offenses and sins he will cause and the eternal damnation to which he will condemn those who commit them, but which also shows the Argentine Jesuit’s unworthiness and hostility to hold the office of Roman Pontiff and universal Pastor of the Lord’s flock.

Inimicus Ecclesiæ, I said in my talk on the vice of consent (here). An enemy who acts with consistency and forethought in doing the exact opposite of what is expected of the Vicar of Christ and the successor of the Prince of Apostles.

We must confront a painful and terrible reality: Bergoglio poses himself as hostile to Catholics who are faithful to the Magisterium – which he mocks, condemns, and marginalizes – and complicit with those who openly contradict what the Church has been teaching unchangingly for two thousand years. Not only that: he wants to lead good Catholics – and with them the few bishops and priests who still profess the faith in its integrity – to separate themselves from the sect that has infiltrated and invaded the Church, provoking them with shameless arrogance so that they feel scandalized and offended.

The inclusiveness Bergoglio is inspired by in his demolition work is the exact opposite of what Our Lord taught us, who in the parable of the wedding banquet (Mt. 22:1-14) leaves no doubt about the need to put on the robe of grace in order to be admitted. In that Gospel passage the Lord who finds a guest without a robe has his servants bind him and cast him into outer darkness, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth (ibid., 13).

The Savior’s words, “You will be my friends if you do what I command you,” (Jn. 15:14) or “Not he who says, ‘Lord, Lord,’ but he who does the will of my Father will enter the Kingdom of Heaven,” (Mt. 7:21) give no cause for misunderstanding, and the fact that a “pope” dares to contradict them is of an unprecedented gravity that cannot be tolerated in any way, for the sake of souls and the offense to God.

Today we are faced with the paradox of a self-proclaimed “master” of the Church – because as such Bergoglio acts – who expels from the banquet those in nuptial robes and indiscriminately admits everyone else to it. But if Bergoglio’s “church” does not want Catholics, how can it call itself “Catholic”? If those who exercise their authority as “pope” do so against the authority of Christ, how can they be considered His vicar?

A splendid painting by Rembrandt, made in 1636, is preserved at the National Gallery in London: the Feast of Balthazar, which takes up the account of the prophet Daniel (Dan 5). The Babylonian king Balthazar, in the midst of a siege by Persia’s King Cyrus the Great, had organized a sumptuous banquet at court, using for the libations the temple’s sacred vessels stolen as booty from Nebuchadnezzar. On that occasion, before all the guests and dignitaries, a hand appeared and wrote unintelligible words on the wall of the royal hall in front of the candelabra (Dan 5:5). It was Daniel who interpreted those obscure words, Mane, Thecel, Phares (Dan 5:25):

Quote

Mane: God has computed your kingdom and put an end to it.
Thecel: you were weighed in the scales and found wanting.
Phares: your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians — (Dan 5:26-28).

In the face of the contemplation of the passio Ecclesiæ at the hands of Bergoglio and his accomplices, we can hope and pray that those who have not believed before the silent action of good may be converted by the disturbing evidence of what is opposed to it, before it is too late.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
November 9, 2023
In Dedicatione Basilicæ Ss.mi Salvatoris

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #1 on:** November 09, 2023, 01:24:35 PM »

"Today we are faced with the paradox of a self-proclaimed “master” of the Church – because as such Bergoglio acts – who expels from the banquet those in nuptial robes and indiscriminately admits everyone else to it. But if Bergoglio’s “church” does not want Catholics, how can it call itself “Catholic”? If those who exercise their authority as “pope” do so against the authority of Christ, how can they be considered His vicar?"

Yeti · « **Reply #2 on:** November 09, 2023, 01:49:54 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on November 09, 2023, 01:24:35 PM

"Today we are faced with the paradox of a self-proclaimed “master” of the Church – because as such Bergoglio acts – who expels from the banquet those in nuptial robes and indiscriminately admits everyone else to it. But if Bergoglio’s “church” does not want Catholics, how can it call itself “Catholic”? If those who exercise their authority as “pope” do so against the authority of Christ, how can they be considered His vicar?"

.

He should be giving people answers, not questions.

This whole thing was a disappointment. He explained that Bergoglio was not the pope in his previous message, and now we're back to this kind of doublespeak.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #3 on:** November 09, 2023, 01:55:11 PM »

Quote from: Yeti on November 09, 2023, 01:49:54 PM

.

He should be giving people answers, not questions.

This whole thing was a disappointment. He explained that Bergoglio was not the pope in his previous message, and now we're back to this kind of doublespeak.

Its a shame that you gain nothing from it.

Then again, nobody's forcing you to read it, so why do you bother?

For me, it seems we finally have another champion to fight for us again.

2Vermont · « **Reply #4 on:** November 09, 2023, 01:57:26 PM »

Quote from: Yeti on November 09, 2023, 01:49:54 PM

.

He should be giving people answers, not questions.

This whole thing was a disappointment. He explained that Bergoglio was not the pope in his previous message, and now we're back to this kind of doublespeak.

Actually, if I remember correctly, he never came right out and said this.

Persto · « **Reply #5 on:** November 10, 2023, 01:07:07 PM »

Quote from: Yeti on November 09, 2023, 01:49:54 PM

.

He should be giving people answers, not questions.

This whole thing was a disappointment. He explained that Bergoglio was not the pope in his previous message, and now we're back to this kind of doublespeak.

Most definitely

songbird · « **Reply #6 on:** November 10, 2023, 01:18:38 PM »

He makes no mention of Our Lady.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #7 on:** November 10, 2023, 01:45:38 PM »

Quote from: SeanJohnson on November 09, 2023, 01:12:51 PM

Beyond the hypocritical definition of “homoaffective persons” – as if one could separate ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ identity from the inherently sinful exercise of sɛҳuąƖity against nature that defines it – ...

This is key. For decades now the Conciliar Vatican has been emphasizing the distinction between the sodomitical "disorder", here euphemized even further as "homaffective", as a deliberate transition toward condoning the sinful relations, and Bergoglio appears to be taking one more step in that direction every week or two. While there is some truth to the distinction, since some may be afflicted with such a disorder while resisting the temptations that accompany it, but the promotion and normalization of this disorder into something less than unnatural seems to be the agenda. Every error usually starts with a kernel of truth, and they use the truth of that initial seed to disguise the error pursuant to it.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #8 on:** November 10, 2023, 01:57:06 PM »

Quote

He should be giving people answers, not questions.

For the 1,000 time...+Vigano's audience are indulters and novus ordoites, who have been brainwashed for 60+ years by new-rome. If he just comes out and declares new-rome heretic and Francis as a non-pope, most will just write him off as an insane extremist, similar to how they've written off Traditionalism for the same.

He's trying to unbrainwash these people, by getting them to think. Most people have to grasp such monumental facts (i.e. the V2 church is a counterfeit) on their own. We take it for granted, because most Trads were never brainwashed. But these people have Stockholm syndrome and the whole idea of V2 being an infiltration and a deep-state conspiracy is a HUGE red pill. Takes time.

songbird · « **Reply #9 on:** November 10, 2023, 02:00:58 PM »

I wonder. Omni magazine, 1990, Oct issue front page sex-change. The article by Roger Gorski actually states how to change sex by a "shot' jab at the right time. in this case newborn. A case is given. A girl is made into a boy at puberty age 12. She grew a penis. These girls are no longer girls in the Dominican Republic and New Guinea. The so-called scientific name given to it is Guevedoces. So, when I did my math, and read this article, the jab would have been given in 1977 or so.

This is man made. Those puffed ball scientists, demons, would like for us to think "God did this, nature in her evolving ways.
When I read this article oh, I was shocked?! Or should that surprise me?! Then if I am correct, it was Roger who was on the Art Bell show. I phoned in and I called him a demon!

Ladislaus · « **Reply #10 on:** November 10, 2023, 03:28:43 PM »

Quote from: Yeti on November 09, 2023, 01:49:54 PM

He should be giving people answers, not questions.

Do you even understand the concept of a rhetorical question?

Just when I think I've seen it all from the rabid +Vigano haters. Outside of the quote from Jorge, these are the only two questions:

Quote

But if Bergoglio’s “church” does not want Catholics, how can it call itself “Catholic”? If those who exercise their authority as “pope” do so against the authority of Christ, how can they be considered His vicar?

English much? These are referred to as rhetorical questions. Google "rhetorical question".

Yeti · « **Reply #11 on:** November 10, 2023, 03:57:36 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on November 10, 2023, 03:28:43 PM

Do you even understand the concept of a rhetorical question?

Just when I think I've seen it all from the rabid +Vigano haters. Outside of the quote from Jorge, these are the only two questions:
English much? These are referred to as rhetorical questions. Google "rhetorical question".

.

Yes, and a rhetorical question is a question. I said he should be providing answers, not questions. What I said was perfectly clear. He needs to stop making rhetorical questions, and instead just tell people the answers to those questions.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #12 on:** November 10, 2023, 04:08:23 PM »

Quote from: Yeti on November 10, 2023, 03:57:36 PM

Yes, and a rhetorical question is a question.

Look it up again. Rhetorical questions are not actual questions, thus the term. They're a rhetorical way of making a statement.

How can that guy be pope? Is not a question, but a statement. It's basically saying "There's no way that guy can be the pope."

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #13 on:** November 10, 2023, 04:17:11 PM »

Quote

Yes, and a rhetorical question is a question.

Quo vadis Domine · « **Reply #14 on:** November 10, 2023, 07:02:40 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on November 10, 2023, 04:17:11 PM

He is right you know, it is technically still a question. The point Yeti is making is that Vigano does a lot of talking and says a lot of right things, but what we need right now are actions and answers.

Author Topic: Vigano Unloads Again (Read 3309 times)

SeanJohnson

Vigano Unloads Again

SeanJohnson

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

Yeti

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

SeanJohnson

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

2Vermont

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

Persto

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

songbird

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

Ladislaus

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

Pax Vobis

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

songbird

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

Ladislaus

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

Yeti

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

Ladislaus

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

Pax Vobis

Re: Vigano Unloads Again

Quo vadis Domine

Re: Vigano Unloads Again