Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò Declared Excommunicated
The Dicastery for the Destruction of the Faith, chaired by Cardinal Tucho Fernández, met on 4th July to conclude the extrajudicial trial of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò.
He was accused and found guilty of schism.
A Vatican press release on 5 July said: "His public statements expressing his refusal to recognise and submit to the Supreme Pontiff, his rejection of communion with the members of the Church who are subject to him, and of the legitimacy and magisterial authority of the Second Vatican Council are well known."
The dicastery pronounced an excommunication latae sententiae, in accordance with canon 1364 § 1 of the Code of Canon Law.
The revocation of the measure is reserved to the Apostolic See. This decision was communicated to Monsignor Viganò on 5 July.
Viganò himself has previously stated that he is not in communion with the Vatican of Francis.
#newsVptibjdhut
I am. And will remain so until the correct authority formally declares that Pope Francis is a heretic. Until that occurs, Pope Francis remains attached to the Divine Seat of Peter. The two cannot be separated except by equal authority: "And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." Therefore I remain in communion with the eternal St. Peter who denied Christ three times. I will not follow his example against the faith (resist) but I will acknowledge his authority when he promotes the faith (recognise). That was the position of His Grace Archbishop Lefebvre.
Carol-
We can absolutely know with certainty that Francis is a formal heretic. What we can’t know with certainty is what follows from that, since the authorities are divided, and the Church has not directly pronounced.
Pt Murphy: "It is of no importance that in past centuries some Pontiff was illegitimately elected or took possession of the Pontificate by fraud; it is enough that he was accepted afterwards by the whole Church as Pope, since by such acceptance he would have become the true Pontiff." - St. Alphonsus Liguori
Sean, how do we know? Because you say so? Because one Archbishop says so? What formal heresy has he declared? Link me. Look, all said and done, if we all rose up against Pope Francis and the Church in Rome in the morning, can you imagine the fall-out that would follow? Every enemy of the Church would love this! There would be a hundred thousand new "churches" within 24 hours. There has to be a central authority to hold us together.
Carol-
Not sure why you're so mystified by how to know a heretic.
If I deny the immaculate conception, I'm a heretic. There's no mystery. If Francis does, same thing. Where's the doubt?
PS to Carol:
Does this article help you (author is not sede):
Pope Francis as Public Heretic: The Evidence Leaves No Doubt — by Dr. John Lamont
Carol... Please be consistent. You insist upon canon law when it suits your preordained opinion, but then dismiss canon law when it your error is revealed. You demonstrate this with your distraction of a quote from Saint alphonsus, which is not applicable to the question at hand.
Pt Murphy: I, but it is applicable to your statement "Br Alexis Bugnolo and others demonstrated conclusively that bregolio never held the papacy from 2014..." Saint Alphonsus says otherwise :)
Sean: For the third time - what dogma/doctrine has Pope Francis denied? He has to be guilty of a formal heresy (like denying the Immaculate Conception) to be automatically ex-communicated. It is not enough to be a suspected heretic.
Carol-
The article I cited by Dr. Lamont lists several:
Pope Francis as Public Heretic: The Evidence Leaves No Doubt — by Dr. John Lamont
There has been many antipopes in the past, and some of those where like that due to their falseness, the people of those times called on them because they saw their fruits, look how saint athanasius went, even the arian pope excommunicated him, and who is the saint and doctor of the church? St Athanasius.
Didn't the jews had the keys of heaven? But Jesus said they weren’t allowing anyone to go in it? This is basically why God chose that precise time in history for his beloved only Son to come down... HIPOCRISY was killing the path forward, their fruits, the jewish top leadership was creating a bottleneck in which no souls could enter heaven, Jesus came and He was hard on the Jewish church back then because of hipocrisy and rotten fruits.
Today, not only fiducia supplicans is the main evidence of apostasy, but you can find such in each of his exhortations, speeches, letters, and enciclycals... His fruits are rotten to the core and thats why we need to warn people of this false prophet and the law is behind us, even our own Lord told us to stay away from such wolves, but also the bible gives us the power to warn on such false prophets.
Sean, I've had a chance to skim through the article by John Lamont. This is my take from his presentation: Pope Francis, due to his modernist view on how we should interpret the faith, is guilty of a "public and deliberate rejection of the faith of the Church"; which is termed as the "canonical crime of heresy". To my understanding, the SSPX totally reject Dr. Lamont's conclusion calling it a mere "theological opinion" with little weight. I think the key word here is "deliberate". We know, especially as a Jesuit, Pope Francis was steeped to the gills in modernist thinking. As such, it is quite possible and more than probable, that he was not deliberately rejecting the faith of the Church; that he is simply blind-sided by his training and formation. Allow me to submit the following example taken from Mr. Lamont's article: In response to the questioning of "1 Dubium about the claim that we should reinterpret Divine Revelation according to the cultural and anthropological changes in vogue" as submitted by a group of Cardinals (including Cardinal Burke) Pope Francis answered: "[a) The answer depends on the meaning you give to the word ‘reinterpret.’ If it is understood as ‘interpret better,’ the expression is valid. In this sense, the Second Vatican Council affirmed that it is necessary that with the work of exegetes—and I would add of theologians—‘the judgment of the Church may mature’ (Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum, 12). As could be argued, such a consideration makes the accusation 'pertinacity in heresy' hard to apply. All it allows is "suspicion of heresy" which does not cause certain automatic excommunication.
Ok is not worth discussing anymore. I will continue calling him false prophet due to his fruits and bergoglians will continue calling him pope and holy father.