Since November of 2019, for almost four years now, Archbishop Vigano has stated very clearly and repeatedly his position that Pope Francis is not the Pope. His position is not a surprise to anyone. Archbishop Vigano offered to do a zoom, but Matt instructed him to send a video and then acted like the video format was a problem. He vetted the transcript of the video and decided that this was not compatible with Bishop Strickland's stance and cancelled Archbishop Vigano. What about this is different from what was said about Matt from the beginning? Matt wants to claim that "unity" was the format. What "unity" are we talking about? Unity in criticizing the direction the Church has and is currently taking. That is the actual theme. Archbishop Vigano is an OG and a key player in that group, but is Bishop Strickland? Let's all let Michael Matt decide. Right? It's all about what Michael Matt decides.

I'm not sure - in fact I've no idea - why they all need protecting in this. I admire Strickland immensely for taking a stand, particularly given that he is a diocesan Bishop, but how much worse could things get for him? Francis can take him out by demanding his resignation any time. How does being 'associated' with Vigano's statement change his position? He's made his position clear and I pray he'll stick with it, but one might just as well say that he shouldn't be seen in the company of any Traditionalist, so let's not invite any.

He was instructed by Matt to send the video. He didn't just decide to do it. Matt told him to do it. Then Matt decided it was a "problem" after he vetted it and knew Strickland wouldn't want to appear to agree with it. But, he knew before he ever saw the video that Strickland wasn't going to appear on the same stage with Vigano if Vigano was free wheeling. I'm sure that was how Matt got Strickland to agree to participate. Matt thought he might be able to control what Vigano could say with an "interview." And Vigano would have none of it. So Matt cancelled him. That's what happened. Isn't it ironic that the Unity conference so ecstatically inflated by Michael Matt had to censor anyone ie Bishop Vigano who just wouldn't unify.

Does this look like Viganò's fault to you?
"This address was prepared in order to be given at the Catholic Identity Conference. However, at the last minute, it was "deleted" from the roster. It is unfortunate that, in the current climate of fear within the Church, the free exchange of ideas and viewpoints is no longer tolerated. Let us pray for the unity of the Church, that unity which can only be grounded in the Truth, who is Jesus Christ." - Archbishop Viganò

I know people who are in contact with the Archbishop at this moment. There is more behind Vigano's declaration than just the question if Bergoglio is pope or not. It is intimately connected to the question of the sacramental transmission of the apostolic succession and its safeguarding. The Archbishop is aware that he has to do something serious that also concerns him personally. At least it is sure at this moment he is really priest. The rest will follow and he is going to act. That is for sure!