In his latest public statement, Carlo Vigano, a schismatic Bishop who has rejected the authority of Pope Francis and of Vatican II, continues a pattern of behavior which is that of an antipope.
It is solely the role of the Pope to approve or disapprove of the documents of an Ecumenical Council. Vigano disapproves of Vatican II, and he expects that this disapproval will cause its rejection among his followers. He hopes that this disapproval would cause the Council eventually to be rejected en bloc. This is solely the role of a Pope, with one exception: once approved, the teaching of an Ecumenical Council cannot be reformed. And this proves that every teaching of every EC on faith and morals is infallible. For non-infallible teachings are non-irreformable. But no teaching of any EC has ever been reformed. Therefore, Vigano not only presents himself as if he already possesses the authority of the Roman Pontiff, he also proves himself to be an antipope. For no true Pope would reject a valid EC or its teaching.
Similarly, Vigano speaks as if he were equal to or above the recent Roman Pontiffs. He proposes teachings for belief by the whole Church, calling those who disagree heretics, as if he could define dogma by his sole authority. He also judges, rebukes, and condemns the recent actions of the Holy See (recent meaning since Vatican II) in declining to use the oath against modernism. Only a Pope has authority over the Holy See.
Then he condemns Pope Francis utterly, across many different public assertions, clearly stating that he thinks “Bergoglio” to be a false pope over a false Church. So also does he condemn all the Bishops who support and follow Francis, that is to say, the body of Bishops. And now, in his most recent public vomit of schism, heresy, and malice toward the Church, he proposes to judge “Ratzinger” and “Montini”, meaning Pope Benedict 16, and Pope Saint Paul VI. Vigano rejects the Church’s decision that Paul VI is a Saint; for he calls Pope Saint Pius X “Saint”, but he refuses to use that title for Paul VI. In this way, he usurps the authority of the Pope to decide who is and is not a canonized Saint.
No one but a Pope has the authority and role that Vigano pretends to have over Councils and the Holy See. And no one but Christ has the role that Vigano pretends to have over the Roman Pontiffs, who are judged by no one but God alone. Carlo Vigano behaves exactly like an antipope, with the sole exception being that he does not use the title of pope. And just as antipopes offend God by usurping a role not given to them, so does Vigano offend God. Moreover, Vigano usurps the role of Christ by pretending to have the authority to judge Councils and Popes. Thus, he is like a weak foreshadowing of the antichrist — a very weak foreshadowing. For he has few followers among the weak in faith, and he has no real power. The only power that he has is to lead the weak in faith away from the Church and out of the Ark of Salvation, by encouraging them to join him in his schism and heresy.
It is troublesome that LifeSiteNews has abandoned its former place as a guardian of the unborn to become a promoter of schism and heresy, and a place for rebellion against the true Catholic faith.
Ronald L Conte Jr
the reproach of Christ 
I think the Holy See should formally excommunicate, laicize Carlo Vigano. It is very harmful to many souls (especially many ignorant souls) that this person is still being called “Archbishop” by different media outlets. He is no longer Archbishop to any faithful Catholic.
Vigano’s attacks to the Bride of Christ (the Church) are very grave and any attack to the Bride of Christ is an attack to Christ Himself for they are ONE, as Marriage. Any claim that the Church as become evil or astray (even to the visible Head), is a claim that Christ has failed as a Bridgegroom.
[Ephesians]
{5:25} Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the Church and handed himself over for her,
{5:26} so that he might sanctify her, washing her clean by water and the Word of life,
{5:27} so that he might offer her to himself as a glorious Church, not having any spot or wrinkle or any such thing, so that she would be holy and immaculate.
Thanks, Francisco. Feel free to post your own articles on this blog, whenever you have time.
Thank you, Ron, for this good article. Archbishop Vigano` praises the 1910 Oath Against Modernism, but I wonder whether he adheres to article three of the Oath. This article affirms that the Church founded by Christ is “built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy and [upon] his successors through the ages.” If Archbishop Vigano` rejects the authority of Pope Francis, the successor to Peter, how can he, in good conscience, take this Oath, which requires Catholics to recognize that the Church is built upon Peter and his successors? The Oath Against Modernism was authorized by St. Pius X. Archbishop Vigano`, though, does not adhere to what St. Pius X teaches in his Major Catechism (Catechismo Maggiore), This Catechism contains this question in the section on the 9th article of the Creed (the Holy Catholic Church): “How should each Catholic behave towards the Pope?” (Come deve comportarsi ogni cattolico verso il Papa?). The answer given is: “Each Catholic must recognize the Pope as Father, Pastor, and universal Teacher and be united with him in mind and heart” (Ogni cattolico deve riconoscere il Papa, qual Padre, Pastore e Maestro universale e stare a lui unito di mente e di cuore). Archbishop Vigano` is hardly united with Pope Francis in mind and heart. Thus, it’s very clear that Archbishop Vigano` is not a true follower of St. Pius X. The only other possibility is that Archbishop Vigano` does not accept Pope Francis as the successor of Peter. If this is the case, he’s a schismatic or a sedevacantist.
Good points, Robert. Also, Vigano’s treatment of Pope Saint Paul VI and Vatican II in his article also shows a refusal to “recognize the Pope as Father, Pastor, and universal Teacher and be united with him in mind and heart”. For he rejects the Ecumenical Council approved by Pope Paul, and is highly critical of Paul VI, as if he were the teacher, father, and pastor over Pope Paul (and really any Pope whose teachings are contrary to Vigano’s own mind).