Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano Is Found Guilty of “Schism” and Excommunicated by Pope Francis
(www.thegatewaypundit.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (21)
sorted by:
sure, but in our view these kinds of posters should then go in the direction of sedevacantism, which they often argue much against
because there's also the principle that a "doubtful pope is no pope"; hence, if there is doubt Francis is a Catholic pope, he would be regarded as not a pope - ergo, Catholics have no pope (sedevacantism).
Frequently instead they seem to promote a confusing position of "recognize and resist", where Vigano says Francis is a Catholic pope and won't obey him and then unsurprisingly is "excommunicated" for "schism".
Yes, he is acting just like Lefebvre, which we disagree with (I agree with the sedevacantists over Vigano/Lefebvre or Francis, to be clear). literally just seems like a "lefebvre remix" for our culture today
It also seems unlikely to me that Francis would have allowed Vigano to become "archbishop" and to promote the kinds of views he had done, unless he was basically in agreement with Francis on things
So in our view both Francis/Vigano are working together to attack Catholicism
I believe once a large amount of Catholics become aware Vatican 2 is not Catholic and that the popes since 1958 are illegitimate, that a new pope can be elected who is traditional, and the confusion of Vatican 2 can be put to rest. I don't think half-measures of Vigano or of accepting and going along with Francis are really enough given the problems that exist
regarding the sister lucys, it sounds plausible but struck me as a distraction from other things (I wasn't aware of the relevance of it to a lot of modern pressing issues)
I understand, although I also don't, as the Vatican seems to have significantly drifted from Catholicism in my view. Like, it hasn't been much of a question once I became aware of the issues, they have quite obviously broken from Catholicism (the Vatican / Vatican 2 / those connected to it) and I wouldn't hesitate to embrace sedevacantism in contrast. It's more a question of how we move that from a minority view to the embraced view and how the Vatican can become Catholic again. I do think it's somewhat of a confusing situation like the Western Schism, i.e. laymen following Francis are not automatically not Catholic for doing so (although they may be to the extent of embracing modern errors)
Yes, well we think JP2 and B16 were also pretty openly anti-Catholic, and so would not have promoted Vigano if Vigano was some kind of traditionalist. JP2 had the assisi "interfaith" prayer events. B16 kissed the Koran and was pretty obviously putting on a "fake conservative" show while promoting modernist philosophy... he was "suspect of heresy" at one point before being elected as "pope": https://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_001_CondemnationRatzinger.htm