Archbishop Viganò letter to President Donald Trump

Thinkingaboutit

Archbishop Viganò perhaps known best for finally depriving the pervert McCarrick of a comfortable retirement after a career of sexual crime, and has now released a stream of letters and statements critical of the current direction of the Catholic Church. The Archbishop rightly sees a connection between the contrived COVID crisis and the riots in the United States and beyond. The Abp commends Pres Trump's efforts.

Lifesite present the letter:

They also provide a copy which can be easily copied: here

We will also discover that the riots in these days were provoked by those who, seeing that the virus is inevitably fading and that the social alarm of the pandemic is waning, necessarily have had to provoke civil disturbances, because they would be followed by repression which, although legitimate, could be condemned as an unjustified aggression against the population.

The Abp will be derided by the unthinking and slaveminded as a conspiracy theorist.

I might make the point that these riots will reinforce the militarisation and aggressive posture seen in policing in the US and beyond, rather than result in a re-visiting of the topic.

smacl

Congratulating Trump for playing his part in the battle between "the children of light and the children of darkness" in the context of the brutal murder by police of a black man and the ensuing protests and rioting has to be one of the worst thought through and deeply unpleasant metaphors I've ever come across.

The guy strikes me as a conspiracy theorist and something of a hypocrite. When he says "there are those who serve themselves, who do not hold any moral principles, who want to demolish the family and the nation, exploit workers to make themselves unduly wealthy, foment internal divisions and wars, and accumulate power and money: for them the fallacious illusion of temporal well-being will one day – if they do not repent – yield to the terrible fate that awaits them, far from God, in eternal damnation" one is reminded of the controversies surrounding his own substantial wealth. From Wikipedia

On 15 November 2018, it was revealed that a civil court in Milan, Italy had issued a ruling in October 2018 which ordered Viganò to surrender 1.8 million euro of inheritance, plus interest and legal fees, to his brother Father Lorenzo Viganò. He had been managing his brother's inheritance since their father's death in 1961 and was ordered to pay back his brother Lorenzo, a Jesuit biblical scholar and priest of the Italian Diocese of Pavia who has resided in Chicago, and whom he has also long been on bad terms with, compensation for the money which he used allegedly from Lorenzo's share in the inheritance, along with interest and legal fees. The money which Lorenzo received accounted for half of what Viganò collected from the inheritance. Lorenzo had previously filed a lawsuit against Viganò in 2010 as well, but later dropped his first case in 2014 after Viganò agreed to donate $180,000 to a children's hospital in Tanzania where a daughter of their sister Rosanna Viganò was working, and also return to Rosanna 8,600 euro ($11,000) used in 1983 in order to buy an apartment.

Viganò's critics allege he sought to use Lorenzo's health problems, which resulted from a stroke, as a reason to avoid taking the position as nuncio to the United States, claiming that he needed to care for his brother, whereas the real reason was that Viganò was seeking to obtain better access to the family's possessions, which he would get by remaining in Rome.

Viganò denied the accusations. His supporters said they were a smear campaign designed to discredit him. The siblings of the Archbishop have come forward in a press release to support his innocence in the case against their brother Lorenzo.

I'd be interested to hear what other people think of this letter. I strongly suspect the majority of people both here and abroad would consider Trumps recent actions entirely reprehensible.

antiskeptic

smacl wrote: »

Congratulating Trump for playing his part in the battle between "the children of light and the children of darkness" in the context of the brutal murder by police of a black man and the ensuing protests and rioting has to be one of the worst thought through and deeply unpleasant metaphors I've ever come across.

The guy strikes me as a conspiracy theorist and something of a hypocrite. When he says "there are those who serve themselves, who do not hold any moral principles, who want to demolish the family and the nation, exploit workers to make themselves unduly wealthy, foment internal divisions and wars, and accumulate power and money: for them the fallacious illusion of temporal well-being will one day – if they do not repent – yield to the terrible fate that awaits them, far from God, in eternal damnation" one is reminded of the controversies surrounding his own substantial wealth. From Wikipedia



I'd be interested to hear what other people think of this letter. I strongly suspect the majority of people both here and abroad would consider Trumps recent actions entirely reprehensible.

Trump is entirely reprehensible. But he only differs by the degree to which he hides not his reprehensible light under a bushel.

America is a cess pit. Democratic or Republican, ignoramus Trump or sauce intellectual Obama. It makes little odds.

smacl

antiskeptic wrote: »

Trump is entirely reprehensible. But he only differs by the degree to which he hides not his reprehensible light under a bushel.

America is a cess pit. Democratic or Republican, ignoramus Trump or sauce intellectual Obama. It makes little odds.

While it is all speculation, I think Obama would have handled both the brutal murder of George Floyd and the Covid-19 pandemic in states considerably better than Trump. I don't think Vigano cosying up to Trump does any favours to either Catholicism or Christianity more generally.

antiskeptic

smacl wrote: »

While it is all speculation, I think Obama would have handled both the brutal murder of George Floyd and the Covid-19 pandemic in states considerably better than Trump. I don't think Vigano cosying up to Trump does any favours to either Catholicism or Christianity more generally.

Depends on your objective I suppose. If you've party (for Trump will move on) who you reckon upholds your objectives more then it makes sense.

Now the objectives of Catholicism and American Christianity might be reprehensible to you, as they are in many ways to me. But it does make sense.

Not quite convinced on Obama doing any better. He headed up a neo-liberal, profit motivated machine and all the fiddling around the edges won't change that. It was Obama, remember who bailed out Wall St. at taxpayers expense

Nick Park

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

The Abp will be derided by the unthinking and slaveminded as a conspiracy theorist.

Put me down as being unthinking and slaveminded then.

I guess an Archbishop's hat made out of tinfoil is always a possibility.

Thinkingaboutit

smacl wrote: »

While it is all speculation, I think Obama would have handled both the brutal murder of George Floyd and the Covid-19 pandemic in states considerably better than Trump. I don't think Vigano cosying up to Trump does any favours to either Catholicism or Christianity more generally.

The BLM ruckus and this strange pandemic wouldn't have happened with Obama, because they are in power, and Obama and Biden were always ready to pander to PRC. Novel coronavirus is a problem for people with chronic lung conditions and the aged, not a reason to close down the world economy.

The will dispute was something designed to discredit the Archbishop. They who tried to re-open a family dispute are arch-hypocrites, who blew money not belong to them to buy apartments in an area of London with a high gay population.

antiskeptic

Anyone who considers themselves conservative yet despises POTUS, does so in spite of the raft of pro-life judges. If it was Pres Hillary war would have been waged on states with restrictions on abortion. The Never Trumpers who sneer would honestly be happier in the safe space of a pro abort Democrat President whom they can attack without any concern that their too pure for the world ideas will ever be tried.

Nick Park

Those who haven't cannot be opportunity to read into and around the matter, cannot be attack. That would be unfair of me, but those who see the light at the end of the cave yet shrink in fear of it, are letting others do their thinking.

Michael J Matt editor of the Remnant, the oldest traditional Catholic newspaper introduces the latest letter. It concerns a parallel church which has emerged alongside the Church which gloried in the social prominence given by offices yet rejected everything She ever taught, or reduce it to a form of words which include the word 'discernment.'

Remember Archbishop Viganó finally exposed McCarrick as an unrepentant pederast who having lobbied for the Archbishop Bergoglio to become Pope, was to settle down to a comfortable retirement, with the accusers as nothing more than fleas.

I hope this isn't too long, but the spoiler tag used here just covers text in black rather than shrink it.

latest Archbishop Viganó letter

Introduction by Michael J. Matt: Over the past half century of crisis in the Catholic Church, one of the main points of division among Tradition-minded Catholics centered around the question of whether there was something inherently contrary to Tradition about the Second Vatican Council itself, or was it merely the Modernist interpretations of the Council that flowed abundantly into the lifeblood of the Church after the close of the Council in 1965.

Over the past few decades, many conservative commentators were ready to admit that the so-called “Spirit of the Council” had led to much devastation in the Church. But they parted company with those of us who felt obliged in conscience to point out that at least some of the sixteen documents themselves were inherently at odds with the constant magisterial teaching of the Church.

In essence, this has been at the heart of the debate for over fifty years. It divided my own family, in fact, and eventually left my father with no choice but to leave The Wanderer and found The Remnant in 1967. In his mind, it was not merely a question of abuse—either of doctrine or liturgy—but rather that Vatican II represented a fundamental and orchestrated reorientation of the Church in the spirit of the modern world.

For many good Catholics (who knew something had gone terribly wrong), it seemed the more prudent course of action to hope and pray that faulty interpretations of the Council would eventually work themselves into a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition and all would end well. For fifty years, this kept them largely silent in the face of radical novelty never before seen in the history of the Church.vigano 1

Pope Benedict XVI himself—recognizing the growing contradiction between the novelties of the Council and what had been taught for 2000 years—wrestled with this dilemma throughout his pontificate. In his last address to the Roman curia on February 14, 2013, he assigned responsibility for the chaos in the Church, not to the Council itself, but rather to what he called the “Council of the Media” or the “Virtual Council” which, according to His Holiness, had “created many calamities, so many problems, so much misery, in reality: seminaries closed, convents closed liturgy trivialized... and the true Council has struggled to materialize, to be realized: the virtual Council was stronger than the real Council.”

In other words, the pontiff believed he could rescue the Council by referring it back to the original intentions of the Council Fathers. But it was too late for that, since the world and the Church could only deal with the one Council that in reality was the Council.

In the end, Pope Benedict abdicated before discovering that illusive “hermeneutic of continuity” from the Council to Tradition. Why? Because it doesn’t exist.

In more recent times, many Catholics have abandoned hope in the Vatican II Rescue Effort. I myself initiated the hashtag “ToHellWithVaticanII”, which garnered criticisms from good friends who were not prepared to face the ramifications of such a bold statement. But as a layman, it seemed abundantly obvious to me that the “misery” and “calamities” and “many problems” that had resulted from Vatican II far outweigh whatever good may have come from it. Whatever the documents of Vatican said or failed to say, it had become obvious to many of us that the event itself was nothing less than revolution.

Given all we’ve seen since 1965—from a crisis in the priesthood, to closed churches, to widespread apostasy, to the breakup of the family and virtual disappearance of religious orders—it is nearly impossible to understand the dogged defense of Vatican II on the part of so many good bishops and priests who, ironically, must now spend their days heroically trying to save souls in the ruins of the post-conciliar Church.

I’m not a theologian, but I am a Catholic father to seven children. And it is the first obligation of every Catholic father to hand the Faith down to his children. But in order to do that, I (like so many other fathers) am obliged to drive 45 minutes to find a Mass that will not scandalize my children. I’ve long since left the parish of my childhood, where I was baptized, in search of a priest who has kept the faith I was taught in the Catholic schools of my childhood. My wife and I have to educate our children at home because, statistically speaking, post-conciliar Catholic schools are where children go to lose the Faith.

The Revolution of Vatican II has torn the Church in half, as shepherd after shepherd flees the flock out of fear of the approaching wolves.

vigano speaking outsideArchbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

The following manifesto, if you will, from Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, rises like a candle in the darkness, confirming that God is still with His Church, that not all shepherds are hirelings and that maybe—just maybe—the pioneer traditional Catholics of yesterday such as Lefevre, Davies, von Hildebrand and Matt, were not renegades but rather loyal sons of the Church, as is Archbishop Viganò himself.

I believe this document is truly historic, in that it is written by one whose life’s calling was to work in the very heart of the post-conciliar Church and at the highest levels. Its author knows of what he speaks. In fact, it could be said that he knows too much, which is why he remains in hiding, not out of fear, but so as to continue his defense of the true Church to which he’s dedicated his entire life and which is now under siege from within.

All the evil around us right now—from the riots, to the burning cities, to the slaughtered unborn, the desecrated altars, the broken families, the abused children, the empty convents and seminaries—can be understood by a careful and humble reading of the words that follow.

The human element of the Church is neither sinless nor free from error, even as the spotless Bride of Christ, in Her divinity, is pure and inviolate. This is not a moment to lose hope, but rather a sign from Heaven that God is preparing the way for the restoration of His Church and to bring an end to forty years wandering in the desert. God is speaking to the world through the words of this faithful shepherd. Read on, dear friends, and pray for him. MJM



Letter of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

vigano crest9 June 2020
Saint Ephrem

I read with great interest the essay of His Excellency Athanasius Schneider published on LifeSiteNews on June 1, subsequently translated into Italian by Chiesa e post concilio, entitled There is no divine positive will or natural right to the diversity of religions. His Excellency’s study summarizes, with the clarity that distinguishes the words of those who speak according to Christ, the objections against the presumed legitimacy of the exercise of religious freedom that the Second Vatican Council theorized, contradicting the testimony of Sacred Scripture and the voice of Tradition, as well as the Catholic Magisterium which is the faithful guardian of both.

The merit of His Excellency’s essay lies first of all in its grasp of the causal link between the principles enunciated or implied by Vatican II and their logical consequent effect in the doctrinal, moral, liturgical, and disciplinary deviations that have arisen and progressively developed to the present day. The monstrum generated in modernist circles could have at first been misleading, but it has grown and strengthened, so that today it shows itself for what it really is in its subversive and rebellious nature. The creature that was conceived at that time is always the same, and it would be naive to think that its perverse nature could change. Attempts to correct the conciliar excesses – invoking the hermeneutic of continuity – have proven unsuccessful: Naturam expellas furca, tamen usque recurret [Drive nature out with a pitchfork; she will come right back] (Horace, Epist. I,10,24). The Abu Dhabi Declaration – and, as Bishop Schneider rightly observes, its first symptoms in the pantheon of Assisi – “was conceived in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council” as Bergoglio proudly confirms.

This “spirit of the Council” is the license of legitimacy that the innovators use to oppose their critics, without realizing that it is precisely confessing that legacy that confirms not only the erroneousness of the present declarations but also the heretical matrix that supposedly justifies them. On closer inspection, never in the history of the Church has a Council presented itself as such a historic event that it was different from any other council: there was never talk of a “spirit of the Council of Nicea” or the “spirit of the Council of Ferrara-Florence,” even less the “spirit of the Council of Trent,” just as we never had a “post-conciliar” era after Lateran IV or Vatican I.

The reason is obvious: those Councils were all, indiscriminately, the expression in unison of the voice of Holy Mother Church, and for this very reason the voice of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Significantly, those who maintain the novelty of Vatican II also adhere to the heretical doctrine that places the God of the Old Testament in opposition to the God of the New Testament, as if there could be contradiction between the Divine Persons of the Most Holy Trinity. Evidently this opposition that is almost gnostic or cabbalistic is functional to the legitimization of a new subject that is voluntarily different and opposed to the Catholic Church. Doctrinal errors almost always betray some sort of Trinitarian heresy, and thus it is by returning to the proclamation of Trinitarian dogma that the doctrines that oppose it can be defeated: ut in confessione veræ sempiternæque deitatis, et in Personis proprietas, et in essentia unitas, et in majestate adoretur æqualitas: Professing the true and eternal Divinity, we adore what is proper to each Person, their unity in substance, and their equality in majesty.vigano 2 2

Bishop Schneider cites several canons of the Ecumenical Councils that propose, in his opinion, doctrines that today are difficult to accept, such as for example the obligation to distinguish Jews by their clothing, or the ban on Christians serving Muslim or Jewish masters. Among these examples there is also the requirement of the traditio instrumentorum declared by the Council of Florence, which was later corrected by Pius XII’s Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis.

Bishop Athanasius comments: “One may rightly hope and believe that a future Pope or Ecumenical Council will correct the erroneous statement made” by Vatican II. This appears to me to be an argument that, although made with the best of intentions, undermines the Catholic edifice from its foundation. If in fact we admit that there may be Magisterial acts that, due to a changed sensitivity, are susceptible to abrogation, modification, or different interpretation with the passage of time, we inevitably fall under the condemnation of the Decree Lamentabili, and we end up offering justification to those who, recently, precisely on the basis of that erroneous assumption, declared that the death penalty “does not conform to the Gospel,” and thus amended the Catechism of the Catholic Church. And, by the same principle, in a certain way we could maintain that the words of Blessed Pius IX in Quanta Cura were in some manner corrected by Vatican II, just as His Excellency hopes could happen for Dignitatis Humanae.

Among the examples he presents, none of them is in itself gravely erroneous or heretical: the fact that the Council of Florence declared that the traditio instrumentorum was necessary for the validity of Orders did not in any way compromise priestly ministry in the Church, leading her to confer Orders invalidly. Nor does it seem to me that one can affirm that this aspect, however important, led to doctrinal errors on the part of the faithful, something which instead has occurred only with the most recent Council. And when in the course of history various heresies spread, the Church always intervened promptly to condemn them, as happened at the time of the Synod of Pistoia in 1786, which was in some way anticipatory of Vatican II, especially where it abolished Communion outside of Mass, introduced the vernacular tongue, and abolished the prayers of the Canon said submissa voce; but even more so when it theorized about the basis of episcopal collegiality, reducing the primacy of the pope to a mere ministerial function. Re-reading the acts of that Synod leaves us amazed at the literal formulation of the same errors that we find later, in increased form, in the Council presided over by John XXIII and Paul VI. On the other hand, just as the Truth comes from God, so error is fed by and feeds on the Adversary, who hates the Church of Christ and her heart: the Holy Mass and the Most Holy Eucharist.

There comes a moment in our life when, through the disposition of Providence, we are faced with a decisive choice for the future of the Church and for our eternal salvation. I speak of the choice between understanding the error into which practically all of us have fallen, almost always without evil intentions, and wanting to continue to look the other way or justify ourselves.vigano 3 3

We have also committed the error, among others, of considering our interlocutors as people who, despite the difference of their ideas and their faith, were still motivated by good intentions and who would be willing to correct their errors if they could open up to our Faith. Together with numerous Council Fathers, we thought of ecumenism as a process, an invitation that calls dissidents to the one Church of Christ, idolaters and pagans to the one True God, and the Jewish people to the promised Messiah. But from the moment it was theorized in the conciliar commissions, ecumenism was configured in a way that was in direct opposition to the doctrine previously expressed by the Magisterium.

We have thought that certain excesses were only an exaggeration of those who allowed themselves to be swept up in enthusiasm for novelty; we sincerely believed that seeing John Paul II surrounded by charmers-healers , buddhist monks, imams, rabbis, protestant pastors and other heretics gave proof of the Church’s ability to summon people together in order to ask God for peace, while the authoritative example of this action initiated a deviant succession of pantheons that were more or less official, even to the point of seeing Bishops carrying the unclean idol of the pachamama on their shoulders, sacrilegiously concealed under the pretext of being a representation of sacred motherhood.

But if the image of an infernal divinity was able to enter into Saint Peter’s, this is part of a cresecendo which the other side foresaw from the beginning. Numerous practicing Catholics, and perhaps also a majority of Catholic clergy, are today convinced that the Catholic Faith is no longer necessary for eternal salvation; they believe that the One and Triune God revealed to our fathers is the same as the god of Mohammed. Already twenty years ago we heard this repeated from pulpits and episcopal cathedrae, but recently we hear it being affirmed with emphasis even from the highest Throne.vigano 4 4

We know well that, invoking the saying in Scripture Littera enim occidit, spiritus autem vivificat [The letter brings death, but the spirit gives life (2 Cor 3:6)], the progressives and modernists astutely knew how to hide equivocal expressions in the conciliar texts, which at the time appeared harmless to most but that today are revealed in their subversive value. It is the method employed in the use of the phrase subsistit in: saying a half-truth not so much as not to offend the interlocutor (assuming that is licit to silence the truth of God out of respect for His creature), but with the intention of being able to use the half-error that would be instantly dispelled if the entire truth were proclaimed. Thus “Ecclesia Christi subsistit in Ecclesia Catholica” does not specify the identity of the two, but the subsistence of one in the other and, for consistency, also in other churches: here is the opening to interconfessional celebrations, ecumenical prayers, and the inevitable end of any need for the Church in the order of salvation, in her unicity, and in her missionary nature.

Some may remember that the first ecumenical gatherings were held with the schismatics of the East, and very prudently with other Protestant sects. Apart from Germany, Holland, and Switzerland, in the beginning the countries of Catholic tradition did not welcome mixed celebrations with Protestant pastors and Catholic priests together. I recall that at the time there was talk of removing the penultimate doxology from the Veni Creator so as not to offend the Orthodox, who do not accept the Filioque. Today we hear the surahs of the Koran recited from the pulpits of our churches, we see an idol of wood adored by religious sisters and brothers, we hear Bishops disavow what up until yesterday seemed to us to be the most plausible excuses of so many extremisms. What the world wants, at the instigation of Masonry and its infernal tentacles, is to create a universal religion that is humanitarian and ecumenical, from which the jealous God whom we adore is banished. And if this is what the world wants, any step in the same direction by the Church is an unfortunate choice which will turn against those who believe that they can jeer at God. The hopes of the Tower of Babel cannot be brought back to life by a globalist plan that has as its goal the cancellation of the Catholic Church, in order to replace it with a confederation of idolaters and heretics united by environmentalism and universal brotherhood. There can be no brotherhood except in Christ, and only in Christ: qui non est mecum, contra me est.

It is disconcerting that few people are aware of this race towards the abyss, and that few realize the responsibility of the highest levels of the Church in supporting these anti-Christian ideologies, as if the Church’s leaders want to guarantee that they have a place and a role on the bandwagon of aligned thought. And it is surprising that people persist in not wanting to investigate the root causes of the present crisis, limiting themselves to deploring the present excesses as if they were not the logical and inevitable consequence of a plan orchestrated decades ago. If the pachamama could be adored in a church, we owe it to Dignitatis Humanae. If we have a liturgy that is Protestantized and at times even paganized, we owe it to the revolutionary action of Msgr. Annibale Bugnini and to the post-conciliar reforms. If the Abu Dhabi Declaration was signed, we owe it to Nostra Aetate. If we have come to the point of delegating decisions to the Bishops’ Conferences – even in grave violation of the Concordat, as happened in Italy – we owe it to collegiality, and to its updated version, synodality.

Thanks to synodality, we found ourselves with Amoris Laetitia having to look for a way to prevent what was obvious to everyone from appearing: that this document, prepared by an impressive organizational machine, intended to legitimize Communion for the divorced and cohabiting, just as Querida Amazonia will be used to legitimize women priests (as in the recent case of an “episcopal vicaress” in Freiburg) and the abolition of Sacred Celibacy. The Prelates who sent the Dubia to Francis, in my opinion, demonstrated the same pious ingenuousness: thinking that Bergoglio, when confronted with the reasonably argued contestation of the error, would understand, correct the heterodox points, and ask for forgiveness.vigano 5 5

The Council was used to legitimize the most aberrant doctrinal deviations, the most daring liturgical innovations, and the most unscrupulous abuses, all while Authority remained silent. This Council was so exalted that it was presented as the only legitimate reference for Catholics, clergy, and bishops, obscuring and connoting with a sense of contempt the doctrine that the Church had always authoritatively taught, and prohibiting the perennial liturgy that for millennia had nourished the faith of an uninterrupted line of faithful, martyrs, and saints. Among other things, this Council has proven to be the only one that has caused so many interpretative problems and so many contradictions with respect to the preceding Magisterium, while there is not one other council – from the Council of Jerusalem to Vatican I – that does not harmonize perfectly with the entire Magisterium or that needs so much interpretation.

I confess it with serenity and without controversy: I was one of the many people who, despite many perplexities and fears which today have proven to be absolutely legitimate, trusted the authority of the Hierarchy with unconditional obedience. In reality, I think that many people, including myself, did not initially consider the possibility that there could be a conflict between obedience to an order of the Hierarchy and fidelity to the Church herself. What made tangible this unnatural, indeed I would even say perverse, separation between the Hierarchy and the Church, between obedience and fidelity, was certainly this most recent Pontificate.

In the Room of Tears adjacent to the Sistine Chapel, while Msgr. Guido Marini prepared the white rocchetto, mozzetta, and stole for the first appearance of the “newly elected” Pope, Bergoglio exclaimed: “Sono finite le carnevalate! [The carnivals are over!],” scornfully refusing the insignia that all the Popes up until then had humbly accepted as the distinguishing garb of the Vicar of Christ. But those words contained truth, even if it was spoken involuntarily: on March 13, 2013, the mask fell from the conspirators, who were finally free of the inconvenient presence of Benedict XVI and brazenly proud of having finally succeeded in promoting a Cardinal who embodied their ideals, their way of revolutionizing the Church, of making doctrine malleable, morals adaptable, liturgy adulterable, and discipline disposable. And all this was considered, by the protagonists of the conspiracy themselves, the logical consequence and obvious application of Vatican II, which according to them had been weakened by the critiques expressed by Benedict XVI. The greatest affront of that Pontificate was liberally permitting the celebration of the venerated Tridentine Liturgy, the legitimacy of which was finally recognized, disproving fifty years of its illegitimate ostracization. It is no accident that Bergoglio’s supporters are the same people who saw the Council as the first event of a new church, prior to which there was an old religion with an old liturgy.vigano 6

It is no accident: what these men affirm with impunity, scandalizing moderates, is what Catholics also believe, namely: that despite all the efforts of the hermeneutic of continuity which shipwrecked miserably at the first confrontation with the reality of the present crisis, it is undeniable that from Vatican II onwards a parallel church was built, superimposed over and diametrically opposed to the true Church of Christ. This parallel church progressively obscured the divine institution founded by Our Lord in order to replace it with a spurious entity, corresponding to the desired universal religion that was first theorized by Masonry. Expressions like new humanism, universal fraternity, dignity of man, are the watchwords of philanthropic humanitarianism which denies the true God, of horizontal solidarity of vague spiritualist inspiration and of ecumenical irenism that the Church unequivocally condemns. “Nam et loquela tua manifestum te facit [Even your speech gives you away]” (Mt 26, 73): this very frequent, even obsessive recourse to the same vocabulary of the enemy betrays adherence to the ideology he inspires; while on the other hand the systematic renunciation of the clear, unequivocal and crystalline language of the Church confirms the desire to detach itself not only from the Catholic form but even from its substance.

What we have for years heard enunciated, vaguely and without clear connotations, from the highest Throne, we then find elaborated in a true and proper manifesto in the supporters of the present Pontificate: the democratization of the Church, no longer through the collegiality invented by Vatican II but by the synodal path inaugurated by the Synod on the Family; the demolition of the ministerial priesthood through its weakening with exceptions to ecclesiastical celibacy and the introduction of feminine figures with quasi-sacerdotal duties; the silent passage from ecumenism directed towards separated brethren to a form of pan-ecumenism that reduces the Truth of the One Triune God to the level of idolatries and the most infernal superstitions; the acceptance of an interreligious dialogue that presupposes religious relativism and excludes missionary proclamation; the demythologization of the Papacy, pursued by Bergoglio as a theme of his pontificate; the progressive legitimization of all that is politically correct: gender theory, sodomy, homosexual marriage, Malthusian doctrines, ecologism, immigrationism... If we do not recognize that the roots of these deviations are found in the principles laid down by the Council, it will be impossible to find a cure: if our diagnosis persists, against all the evidence, in excluding the initial pathology, we cannot prescribe a suitable therapy.

This operation of intellectual honesty requires a great humility, first of all in recognizing that for decades we have been led into error, in good faith, by people who, established in authority, have not known how to watch over and guard the flock of Christ: some for the sake of living quietly, some because of having too many commitments, some out of convenience, and finally some in bad faith or even malicious intent. These last ones who have betrayed the Church must be identified, taken aside, invited to amend and, if they do not repent they must be expelled from the sacred enclosure. This is how a true Shepherd acts, who has the well-being of the sheep at heart and who gives his life for them; we have had and still have far too many mercenaries, for whom the consent of the enemies of Christ is more important than fidelity to his Spouse.vigano 7

Just as I honestly and serenely obeyed questionable orders sixty years ago, believing that they represented the loving voice of the Church, so today with equal serenity and honesty I recognize that I have been deceived. Being coherent today by persevering in error would represent a wretched choice and would make me an accomplice in this fraud. Claiming a clarity of judgment from the beginning would not be honest: we all knew that the Council would be more or less a revolution, but we could not have imagined that it would prove to be so devastating, even for the work of those who should have prevented it. And if up until Benedict XVI we could still imagine that the coup d’état of Vatican II (which Cardinal Suenens called “the 1789 of the Church”) had experienced a slowdown, in these last few years even the most ingenuous among us have understood that silence for fear of causing a schism, the effort to repair papal documents in a Catholic sense in order to remedy their intended ambiguity, the appeals and dubia made to Francis that remained eloquently unanswered, are all a confirmation of the situation of the most serious apostasy to which the highest levels of the Hierarchy are exposed, while the Christian people and the clergy feel hopelessly abandoned and that they are regarded by the bishops almost with annoyance.

The Abu Dhabi Declaration is the ideological manifesto of an idea of peace and cooperation between religions that could have some possibility of being tolerated if it came from pagans who are deprived of the light of Faith and the fire of Charity. But whoever has the grace of being a Child of God in virtue of Holy Baptism should be horrified at the idea of being able to construct a blasphemous modern version of the Tower of Babel, seeking to bring together the one true Church of Christ, heir to the promises made to the Chosen People, with those who deny the Messiah and with those who consider the very idea of a Triune God to be blasphemous. The love of God knows no measure and does not tolerate compromises, otherwise it simply is not Charity, without which it is not possible to remain in Him: qui manet in caritate, in Deo manet, et Deus in eo [whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him] (1 Jn 4:16).

It matters little whether it is a declaration or a Magisterial document: we know well that the subversive mens of the innovators plays games with these sort of quibbles in order to spread error. And we know well that the purpose of these ecumenical and interreligious initiatives is not to convert those who are far from the one Church to Christ, but to divert and corrupt those who still hold the Catholic Faith, leading them to believe that it is desirable to have a great universal religion that brings together the three great Abrahamic religions “in a single house”: this is the triumph of the Masonic plan in preparation for the kingdom of the Antichrist!new subscription ad

Whether this materializes through a dogmatic Bull, a declaration, or an interview with Scalfari in La Repubblica matters little, because Bergoglio’s supporters wait for his words as a signal to which they respond with a series of initiatives that have already been prepared and organized for some time. And if Bergoglio does not follow the directions he has received, ranks of theologians and clergy are ready to lament over the “solitude of Pope Francis” as a premise for his resignation (I think for example of Massimo Faggioli in one of his recent essays). On the other hand, it would not be the first time that they use the Pope when he goes along with their plans and get rid of him or attack him as soon as he does not.

Last Sunday, the Church celebrated the Most Holy Trinity, and in the Breviary it offers us the recitation of the Symbolum Athanasianum, now outlawed by the conciliar liturgy and already reduced to only two occasions in the liturgical reform of 1962. The first words of that now-disappeared Symbolum remain inscribed in letters of gold: “Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat Catholicam fidem; quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit, absque dubio in aeternum peribit – Whosoever wishes to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic faith; For unless a person shall have kept this faith whole and inviolate, without doubt he shall eternally perish.”

+ Carlo Maria Viganò

Translated by Giuseppe Pellegrino

Nick Park

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

Nick Park

Those who haven't cannot be opportunity to read into and around the matter, cannot be attack. That would be unfair of me, but those who see the light at the end of the cave yet shrink in fear of it, are letting others do their thinking.

Just because someone holds a different opinion to you doesn't mean that they are afraid, or are letting others do their thinking.

I can assure you I have absolutely no fear whatsoever about pandemics, the racial injustices in the US (and elsewhere), Trump or Vigano. I have looked into the issues, determined for myself which voices sound credible or not, and am trusting God.

And, after all that, I think Archbishop Vigano sounds a bit unhinged.

smacl

The BLM ruckus and this strange pandemic wouldn't have happened with Obama, because they are in power, and Obama and Biden were always ready to pander to PRC.

Are you seriously suggesting that the Corona virus pandemic would not have happened with Obama in the White House???

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

Novel coronavirus is a problem for people with chronic lung conditions and the aged

Having had a friend of the family (early 50s, healthy, with no underlying conditions) die of Covid-19 two weeks ago and another close friend (mid-40s, martial arts instructor, in excellent health) have a very close call, I can assure you that the above assertion is utter nonsense. While the disease has claimed considerably more lives among the elderly and high risk groups it has proven fatal to tens of thousands of people worldwide that are not part of these groups. It has also disproportionately affected the less advantaged, notably the black population in the states and the BAME population in UK.

...not a reason to close down the world economy

Those countries that instituted a lock down early and implemented more test and trace have benefited from a considerably smaller infection rate and fatality rate, e.g. 654 deaths per million in the UK versus 4 deaths per million in Australia and also in New Zealand. This in turn results in a shorter lock-down, quicker return to normality and greatly reduced overall cost. Ignoring the human toll, failing to deal adequately with the disease is liable to result in a swamped and broken health system that is a necessary part of any functioning society. I'd speculate that abandoning your health system in a pandemic would result in far greater and more long term economic and societal damage than a lock-down.

antiskeptic

@thinkingaboutit rather than quoting, for obvious reasons.

I'm afraid I'm not a single issue kind of guy. I couldn't give a rat's ass that the Republicans will have more pro life judges than the Democrats. I take the whole and as far as the US is concerned, both sides are as corrupt as each other. What benefit a smattering of pro life judges when the Republicans are even more war mongering than the Democrats (and that's an ask)

I voted enthusiastically Green last election here. Despite them being pro abortion, whereas you would more likely find an anti abortion candidate in FF. Well, the way I see it, it's not much use worrying about the relative trifle of death by abortion when we're staring global meltdown in the face, is it.

You're a Christian right? You should know then that the world is fallen and beyond own-derived hope. And so, it's a question of the least worst option.

With a sick individual in the Whitehouse and all that that entails, my enemies enemy becomes my friend. You ever do the time management matrix? The difference between urgent and important? Well Trump is urgent.

one world order

Archbishop Vigano speaks the truth which is kept quiet in today’s mass produced media with hidden agendas. There is a spiritual war going on in the world between those who worship lucifer in their satanic rituals that control the world through the media, financial system, film and music industries, who are against those who have put their trust in Jesus Christ for their salvation.

John F Kennedy warned us of their power and how they have infiltrated organisations around the world including the Catholic Church. They want God out of society and the world under their control. From unleashing the virus into the world and the falling effect of it in the US, the media has now created the race wars to divide America and stop Trump getting re-elected.

Nick Park

smacl wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that the Corona virus pandemic would not have happened with Obama in the White House???

Well, its effects on the US probably wouldn't have been nearly as lethal.

Carlo Maria Viganò has been a scumbag from the womb and will be a scumbag to the grave.

Mancomb Seepgood

There is a piece on Cardinal Vigano here - it's from NCR so the OP may well consider it to be a media outlet under the dark forces whom he isn't naming: https://www.ncronline.org/news/people/tweet-trump-puts-controversial-archbishop-vigan-back-us-politics

In short,this lad seems to have decided his ministry is to dive into the sewer that is US politics, particularly the conspiracy-mongering end of things around Donald Trump.

Thinkingaboutit

The Milanese will and other claims made against Abp Vignanó were long ago discredited. Even if they were true, which they are not, how does it compare with Francis offering Gustavo Zanchetta, creditably accused of sexual and financial crimes, utter disgraced, a made up job in the Vatican?

Nick Park

The places ravaged by the Chinese virus are generally Democrat ruled. They had all the tools (Democrat Governors and legislatures, mayors, all people who've proven to be tools, utter tools) at their disposal to show Pres Trump up. Atop that Federal resources were generously provided, even sometimes overhasty as oxygenation with mask and hose rather than a ventilator, result in better outcomes for many, it was reported. Can POTUS be blamed for placing COVID suffererers in nursing homes, which Governor Cuomo did? President Trump cannot be blamed for problems where his authority is strictly limited.

antiskeptic

I can comprehend voting for a pro-abortion party. All parties sitting in the Dail are that. Enthusiastically? C'mon. If they can identified as worshiping anything but their own political careers, they would be Gaians, with little regard for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They enthusiastically support abortion, something even the ancient Romans regarding with deep disquiet. Still, they are better than any bishop including the one in Rome who cannot stop talking about that. The righteous are as as bold as a lion, spreading the Gospel with boldness, and have no need of talking on topics which belong to others.


smacl

We will discover the back story to this later, or we won't be told until the youngest alive have passed. It is well known that healthy seeming people can have grievous underlying conditions, the famed 'co-morbidities.' It still does not alter that the older, obese and those with weakened lungs through medical complaints, were most vulnerable. A great portion of BAME deaths, were sadly aided by very poor diets and lifestyles resulting in obesity. That was perhaps a cultural issue, anyhow not something that alters the nature of COVID. It is no Spanish Flu. Given the incompetence of so many governments, if similar appeared, it would likely claim more than 20 million, and all those ill administered medications, against which a virus can evolve, would likely increase the death toll.

Ecumenism does not please God

This is an interview given to Vaticanist Marco Tosatti which SSPX News report.

harrylittle

smacl wrote: »

While it is all speculation, I think Obama would have handled both the brutal murder of George Floyd and the Covid-19 pandemic in states considerably better than Trump. I don't think Vigano cosying up to Trump does any favours to either Catholicism or Christianity more generally.

Obama I would suspect is behind the whole George Floyd rioting ...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN3-uuVldNc

smacl

harrylittle wrote: »

Obama I would suspect is behind the whole George Floyd rioting ...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN3-uuVldNc

The basis for your assertion here is about a dream some lady had which she titled "Obama and the red wedding". In what sense is that any anyway whatsoever credible? You do realise "The red wedding" is a rather popular episode of Game of Thrones? You might as well say that it actually Walder Frey who is at the root of America's current woes. :pac:

smacl

Nick Park wrote: »

Well, its effects on the US probably wouldn't have been nearly as lethal.

I agree entirely, but when the poster said

The BLM ruckus and this strange pandemic wouldn't have happened with Obama, because they are in power, and Obama and Biden were always ready to pander to PRC. Novel coronavirus is a problem for people with chronic lung conditions and the aged, not a reason to close down the world economy.

I rather doubt it was a comment in support of Obama.

Cabaal

harrylittle wrote: »

Obama I would suspect is behind the whole George Floyd rioting ...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN3-uuVldNc

Step away from the coolaid.

Thinkingaboutit

Lifesitenews refutation of the fake news effort by the Vatican against Abp Viganó. The court case was the result of a bitter campaign of calumny by his brother, Fr Lorenzo Viganó. While they words below are from his lawyer, they seem a fair representation of the whole sorry saga.

For over 10 years, Fr. Lorenzo Viganò has subjected Archbishop Viganò to a judicial siege and a veritable defamation campaign in the press, while failing to inform obliging journalists that the accusations of Fr. Lorenzo Viganò have been abandoned or dismissed in the 10 civil, criminal, and administrative cases attempted to date.

Francis must be annoyed that Abp Viganó is not like his friend Gustavo Zanchetta on trial in Argentina and credibly accused of sexual assaults against males and personal dishonesty. It is quite unusual that someone accused of financial crimes be put in charge of a major portion of the Vatican's huge property empire. Wealth can draw the most depraved individuals. Sometimes it can both holy and prudent for the Church not to have too much of it beyond what's needed for the Mass and care of the poor. Henry Sire identified how Francis likes to appoint compromised men who will be entirely beholden to him. They can be got rid of easily, and will be stupidly grateful to be kept around. Desperate men can be useful to pathological personalities.

[url=https://www.complicitclergy.com/2020/06/13/argentine-bishop-accused-of-sexual-misconduct-back-to-work-at-vatican/[/url]