The one holy Catholic Church is Apostolic. She is only that Church led by the successors of Peter and the successors of the other Apostles, the body of Bishops. The Church can never be a remnant of self-proclaimed “faithful” who are separate from the successors to the Apostles. She is always Apostolic. That is one way that we identify the true Church. The true Church is also catholic, meaning universal. Again, the Church cannot be these few faithful in one corner of the world. She is the worldwide Church led by the successors of Peter and the other Apostles throughout the world.
Previously, Vigano accused Francis of apostasy, and stopped referring to him as Pope. Vigano does not believe that “Bergoglio” is the valid Roman Pontiff.
Recently, Bishop Carlo Vigano openly denied the Apostolic nature of the Church. “The Church of Christ has nothing to do with those who, for the past sixty years, have executed a plan to occupy her.” [Scapegoating Francis]
Vigano rejects the Vatican Council and the Popes since that time. He is a sedevacantist. He might deny this by making a pretense of holding recent Pope other than Francis to be valid. But his words speak for themselves. If the Church has nothing to do with those who occupy Her, meaning those who teach what Vatican II taught, that includes all the recent Popes, including John Paul One, who chose the name John Paul to continue the work of the Council.
To Vigano, “the Bergoglian anti-church” began with Vatican II and is the fruit of its flower. “For sixty years, we have witnessed the eclipse of the true Church by an anti-church….”
Now what Vigano proposes cannot be true. For the Church is always Apostolic. If the Church led by the successors of the Apostles — all the Popes and Bishops who support and follow Vatican II — were an anti-Church, what would be the true Church? The Church must be universal and apostolic. And so the true Church cannot be a few schismatic Bishops who reject Francis and reject the body of Bishops. The true Church can only be that which is led by Pope after Pope and by the Bishops in communion with the Pope worldwide. By rejecting this fundamental nature of the Church, Her universal and apostolic nature, Vigano denies that the true Church is Apostolic. He denies also that it is universal, the body of Bishops dispersed in the world, led by the Pope. And therefore, Vigano rejects the indefectibility of the Church. He thinks the universal apostolic Church has become an anti-Church, and the true Church is led by a handful of scattered Bishops who can’t agree among themselves about anything, and a few schismatic media outlets and some of their readership. That is not a Church.
Vigano: “But with the Second Vatican Council, the darkness of this spurious entity came over the Church.”
Every Ecumenical Council is infallible in its teachings on faith and morals, as Bellarmine and Ludwig Ott have taught. So Vatican II could not be the beginning of an anti-Church led by the successors to the Apostles.
Vigano then praises the schismatics Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and his cohort. And he claims to believe in the indefectibility of the Church. But if any single Council or Pope ever went astray from the true faith, or if as Vigano claims, a Council, a series of Popes, and the body of Bishops since Vatican II, all went astray, then the Church would have defected. What sense would it make to have a Church that is indefectible, if Councils, Popes, and the body of Bishops could all become an anti-Church?
The god that Vigano worships is not all-powerful; he is a weak and short-sighted god invented by Vigano’s own weak faithless mind.
The true God is all-powerful, and so He is able to keep every Ecumenical Council from all errors on faith and morals, and from grave errors on discipline and prudential judgment. He is able to preserve the Church by the Rock of the successive Popes, who each have the charism of truth and never failing faith. Thus, by grace and providence does God sweetly and easily keep the Church exceedingly secure against the gates of Hell.
Why does it seem to Vigano has if the Church has become an anti-Church? because Vigano is a heretic and schismatic. Why does it seem to the leaders of the anti-Francis Catholic media outlets that Francis has taught grave error? because are heretics and schismatics. They are looking at the true holy Catholic Apostolic Church through heresy-colored glasses, and so the Church looks heretical. But it is not. It is only their lack of faith that leads them to reject Pope after Pope and Council after Council.
Vigano is lying. He does not only reject Vatican II. He rejects the teachings of Vatican I on the never-failing faith of the Popes and the graces of God that keep the Apostolic see unblemished by any error. He rejects the teaching of the Council of Trent that not only baptized Christians are children of God by spiritual adoption, but also all those who are in the state of grace by a baptism of desire. And, as the Church has taught for a very long time, this desire may be implicit.
Therefore, the gay persons condemned by conservatives for living in sin may be in a state of grace and may be on the path to Heaven, despite their objective mortal sins. But the schismatics and heretics who attack the Pope and the Church with such malice as Vigano displays have no excuses. They cannot claim invincible ignorance, as they know that the Church teaches. Prostitutes and tax collectors are getting into the kingdom of heaven before them. If gay persons cannot be in invincible ignorance, then how can Bishops and priests (who oppose the Pope) be in invincible ignorance? They will be judged by the measure that they have chosen to judge others.
The issue about civil unions is not so much legal, and it is soteriological. If gay persons living together can be in the state of grace and be saved, by a sincere conscience, perhaps the State should leave them alone, and let them live according to freedom of religion and of conscience. But the papal accusers believe that such persons are not saved, as they confuse objective mortal sin with actual mortal sin. They believe such persons are condemned by their objective behavior, regardless of conscience. So then, how will these schismatics and heretics be judged by God? And if they are merciless to others, will they ask for mercy before God?
What would Jesus say? The same thing He said to the woman caught in adultery. Do not stone these persons, with words or actions. Teach them the truth on faith and morals. But do not force them to live contrary to their consciences.
Pope Leo XIII, 1890: “Bishops are deprived of the right and power of ruling, if they deliberately secede from Peter and his successors; because, by this secession, they are separated from the foundation on which the whole edifice must rest. They are therefore outside the edifice itself; and for this very reason they are separated from the fold, whose leader is the Chief Pastor; they are exiled from the Kingdom, the keys of which were given by Christ to Peter alone.”
Blessed Pope Pius IX, 1873, on those who reject the teachings of the First Vatican Council: “For these writings attack and pervert the true power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff and the bishops, who are the successors of blessed Peter and the apostles; they transfer it instead to the people, or, as they say, to the community. They obstinately reject and oppose the infallible magisterium both of the Roman Pontiff and of the whole Church in teaching matters. Incredibly, they boldly affirm that the Roman Pontiff and all the bishops, the priests and the people conjoined with him in the unity of faith and communion fell into heresy when they approved and professed the definitions of the Ecumenical Vatican Council. Therefore they deny also the indefectibility of the Church and blasphemously declare that it has perished throughout the world and that its visible Head and the bishops have erred.”
Is this a Manifesto for the formation of the “true catholic church” that will have soon their own conclave, or what? Did they choose their see already, because St Peter’s see is somehow “occupied”?
I read: “…the flaunted ecumenical embraces with the schismatic Athenagoras, the requests for forgiveness for the Crusades, the abolition of the Index,… The coup de grâce of this attitude was codified in the Reformed Liturgy, which manifests its embarrassment of Catholic dogma by silencing it …the Most Holy Eucharist is merely a symbol of Christ’s presence among us.”
So…the anathemas should be never lifted by St Paul Vi and the ecumenical patriarch Athenagoras and they should never embrace each other? How about pope Benedict who did similar gestures with today’s ecumenical patriarch Bartholomeus who visited Lourdes and Rome and knelt in front of St Peter’s tomb?
The Holy Mass celebrated everyday throughout the world (the so called new rite) is “embarrassment of Catholic dogma by silencing it”? And the outright lie: “the Most Holy Eucharist is merely a symbol of Christ’s presence among us”. If Vigano didn’t notice it, the hundred thousand priests who celebrate the Rite of the Catholic Church do believe in the Eucharist and do not share his views of their views about the Holy Eucharist!
The overall rejection of Vatican II even in smaller matters is astounding. Did Lefebvre reach that far?
“the deep church may continue to bear the trademark “Catholic Church,” but it will be the slave of the New Order thinking,”
Deep church and deep state, so useful terms. And how about the New World order, that John Paul II wanted? How about the New World Order that president Bush wanted? How about the mandate to build the earthly Kingdom of God proclaimed in the Sermon of the Mount, that Christian kings could not realize being always busy in fratricidal wars inside the Christendom when outside enemy didn’t endanger them enough? The care for the poor is not overstated,if Vigano and his followers think of the majority of fellow Catholic “brothers” that do not enjoy the middle class American living standard with several cars and properties above 300,000$ rather pray and in many cases beg for their daily bread! That arrogance towards the most vulnerable little ones cries to God, as the Bible clearly indicates. How didn’t Vigano add the usual “fight for life against abortion” to justify his outrageous hegemonic elitist view towards the majority of the Catholics who are simply put, POOR even by the standards of the countries they are born in?
I just can’t go further. For me that is the Manifesto of Satan declared in plain daylight. Maybe willed by the permissive will of God to use it to finally separate the apostates. Of course Vigano deserves to be excommunicated long ago for smaller writings. This writing is an anti-encyclical. It will be sad if we have to just swallow it, again, and see how each next day more sincere but deluded people are dragged by the flood of apostasy. Let it not be! Because not only adulterers and tax collectors but also descendants of heretics (the protestants) are much much closer to the Kingdom of God than what we read. It is a war declaration. I think latae sententiae should be applied without delay, for the sake of the billion Catholics. A former Catholic priest spiritual director of Medjugorje seers was officially excommunicated these days for much, much smaller trespasses (however sad they were). We cannot allow a double standard here. Vigano is simply no more a member of the Church and he exposes it in length and detail. If the standard is so much enlarged of allowing Vigano to remain inside the Church, then not only the orthodox and protestants but also the agnostics and a number of others should be admitted automatically. The new low set is really low and makes a clear public scandal.
PS actually I was wrong, Vigano DID put the pro-life in his own “arguments” twisting it to unrecognizable extend. We read:
“the “freedom to choose” abortion theorized by democratic politicians finds its counterbalance in the no less aberrant “religious freedom” theorized by the Council, which today is stubbornly defended by the anti-church. If it is not permissible for a Catholic to support a politician who defends the right to abortion, it is even less permissible to approve a Prelate who defends the “freedom” of an individual to endanger his immortal soul by “choosing” to remain in mortal sin. ”
And who is to set the definitions of sins? The inquisitor Vigano, not the successor of Peter? Didn’t they burn the heretics in past centuries in order to save their immortal souls? It is just scandalous the idea to compare the indisputable great evil of abortion to the Vatican II Council and to call for open dissent against bishops who would “tolerate” certain sinful behavior out of pastoral concerns for the souls. Again it is not Vigano to decide what is a sin and what is not. I could be more explicit but do not want to have too heavy comments. St John Paul II removed certain moral actions of the youth sins from the list of mortal sins under some circumstances, and let the decision to be made by the confessors. It is Peter who looses and binds, it is not the inquisitor!
The above comparison cries in the ears of everyone who cares even a little for the aborted precious babies, for a stable society, and for the Church role in it, even if he is not Catholic. There are many such respected people. What we read above IS SCANDALOUS. What point to analyse theological details if we see a clear challenge of everything that is sacred? So to be against abortion one has to be also against Vatican II? Is there any barrier that Vigano would consider a red line after that statement?
Tölzer Knabenchor – Ave verum
According to Vigano’s perspective of the world and the Church, those kids from Catholic Bavaria are plunged into some monstrous deep church structure, with their priests and bishops being modernists (i.e. satanists) who lead them straight to hell. That applies to the majority of 1.329 billion catholics worldwide, minus the followers of Vigano who are no more than 10 millions. That applies to 5,304 Bishops (minus 50 Viganists at most) and 415,656 Priests (let put the Viganists at 1,000 although I doubt it). When all those millions of kids and their parents attend the Holy Mass they do not attend a valid Mass according to Vigano. When they receive Holy Communion they do not receive the Body and Blood of Christ but just its symbolic presentation. Because their fallen out of grace priests already sold out to Satan their souls and the souls of countless kids with their parents by adopting St Paul VI rite and serving it with dignity all their lives (many priests are young enough to even remember pre-Vatican II – now in their 40s and 50s). And of course God’s judgment is not following democratic majority but the “dogma” presented by….Vigano?
Does it mean we must subscribe to the newly formulated “church doctrine” that apparently will serve as a base for the “real remnant church”? And most likely a non canonical conclave that will elect the “true successor” who in turn will cancel Vatican II as proposed previously by Vigano? Frankly, I do not know. I hope it doesn’t. I just shiver what awaits those innocent kids and their parents who are not necessarily theologians, who didn’t even read Vigano’s words. They don’t have to…but they will go to hell for that!
But their sin doesn’t end there. The kids above sing Mozart’s Ave Verum – and we all know who Mozart was – a member of masonic lounge who had frivolous lifestyle (although married), who didn’t keep his account balance and died in poverty as a result of his overall failure. He didn’t want to be successful in life and he wasn’t successful according to today’s terms. He wrote music for God instead, music that is played in virtually all Catholic churches around the world. “Schismatic” churches, actually!
The accusations of Vigano will turn against him on the Judgment Day and even before that. Satan is the biggest accuser of all and he always finds the best accusations based on our real faults. Because we are all humans. Because Jesus died exactly to save the fallen ones. The opposite of what Vigano teaches.
Dies Irae – Mozart – Requiem
The Berliner Philharmoniker conducted by Claudio Abbado
with the Swedish Radio Choir singer
Recorded at Salzburger Dom Cathedral, Salzburg, Austria in 1999