Italian archbishop says he faces Vatican trial over Pope Francis criticism A former Catholic church diplomat and virulent critic of Pope Francis has said the Vatican is putting him on trial for denying …More
Italian archbishop says he faces Vatican trial over Pope Francis criticism
A former Catholic church diplomat and virulent critic of Pope Francis has said the Vatican is putting him on trial for denying the pontiff’s legitimacy.
Carlo Maria Viganò, 83, an ultra-conservative who was the Vatican’s ambassador to the US from 2011 to 2016, said the powerful department of doctrine had summoned him on Thursday to hear the charges.
In posts in several languages on X, Viganò said the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith had set out accusations “of having committed the crime of schism” – that is, splitting the Catholic church.
He was also charged with “having denied the legitimacy of ‘Pope Francis’, of having broken communion ‘with Him’, and of having rejected the Second Vatican Council” in the 1960s, which set the church on a modernising path, Viganò wrote.
The retired Italian archbishop said he was facing an “extrajudicial penal trial”, an accelerated process.
“I regard the accusations against …More
A former Catholic church diplomat and virulent critic of Pope Francis has said the Vatican is putting him on trial for denying the pontiff’s legitimacy.
Carlo Maria Viganò, 83, an ultra-conservative who was the Vatican’s ambassador to the US from 2011 to 2016, said the powerful department of doctrine had summoned him on Thursday to hear the charges.
In posts in several languages on X, Viganò said the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith had set out accusations “of having committed the crime of schism” – that is, splitting the Catholic church.
He was also charged with “having denied the legitimacy of ‘Pope Francis’, of having broken communion ‘with Him’, and of having rejected the Second Vatican Council” in the 1960s, which set the church on a modernising path, Viganò wrote.
The retired Italian archbishop said he was facing an “extrajudicial penal trial”, an accelerated process.
“I regard the accusations against …More
Oremus pro
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
exsurgedomine.it/240621-announcement/
This anonymous “canon lawyer” considers my statement as a proof of my schismatic will: but the whole question concerns which is the “church” to which Bergoglio belongs and the de facto schism from the true Church that he has already accomplished over and over again with his declarations, with his acts of government, and with his most eloquent behavior of open …More
exsurgedomine.it/240621-announcement/
This anonymous “canon lawyer” considers my statement as a proof of my schismatic will: but the whole question concerns which is the “church” to which Bergoglio belongs and the de facto schism from the true Church that he has already accomplished over and over again with his declarations, with his acts of government, and with his most eloquent behavior of open hostility to all that is Catholic. Bergoglio’s “church” is not the Catholic Church, but rather that “conciliar church” born from Vatican Council II and recently rebranded with the no less heretical name of “synodal church.” If it is from this “church” that I am declared to be separated by schism, it will be for me a cause for honor and pride.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
June 21, 2024
S. Aloisii Gonzagæ Confessoris
This anonymous “canon lawyer” considers my statement as a proof of my schismatic will: but the whole question concerns which is the “church” to which Bergoglio belongs and the de facto schism from the true Church that he has already accomplished over and over again with his declarations, with his acts of government, and with his most eloquent behavior of open hostility to all that is Catholic. Bergoglio’s “church” is not the Catholic Church, but rather that “conciliar church” born from Vatican Council II and recently rebranded with the no less heretical name of “synodal church.” If it is from this “church” that I am declared to be separated by schism, it will be for me a cause for honor and pride.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
June 21, 2024
S. Aloisii Gonzagæ Confessoris
Josefa Menendez
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Der einzige Freimaurer-Usurpator und Feind Gottes im Vatikan ist Bergoglio. Exkommunizierte (Bergoglio) können nicht andere exkommunizieren. Der Homosex-Bergoglio ist ein Wolf im Schafspelz und will nicht, dass seine Verbrechen und seinen Hass gegen die von Christus gegründete katholische, apostolische Tradition angeprangert werden. Sonst könnten diejenigen, die noch blind sind, endlich erwachen.
Oremus pro
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Announcement regarding the start of the extrajudicial criminal trial for schism
(Art. 2 SST; can. 1364 CIC)
All Saints
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Rome only reacted after Vigano publicly accused him of sodomy. Funny that.
Ivan Tomas
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
It will be interesting to know what more of globohomo infiltration hard evidences Abp. Vigano have.
Sean Johnson
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Is +Vigano Schismatic?
No doubt, tomorrow all the media around the world will report that +Vigano was excommunicated for the crime of schism, for questioning the legitimacy of Francis.
But does questioning the legitimacy of the Roman Pontiff (or papal claimant) always present a clear cut case of schism?
Not according to many approved theologians and canonists.
Here’s what a few of them have to say …More
Is +Vigano Schismatic?
No doubt, tomorrow all the media around the world will report that +Vigano was excommunicated for the crime of schism, for questioning the legitimacy of Francis.
But does questioning the legitimacy of the Roman Pontiff (or papal claimant) always present a clear cut case of schism?
Not according to many approved theologians and canonists.
Here’s what a few of them have to say on the subject:
1. “Finally, those who refuse to obey the Roman Pontiff because they consider his person worthy of suspicion or doubtfully elected cannot be counted among the schismatics…” (Wernz-Vidal: Ius Canonicum , vol. vii, n. 398)
2. “There is no schism if one…refuses obedience to the extent that one…suspects the person of the pope or the validity of his election…” (Szal, Abbot Ignatius: Communication of Catholics with Schismatics , CUA, 1948, p.2)
3. “…is not a schismatic who refuses submission to the pontiff for having probable doubts concerning the legitimacy of his election or his power…” (de Lugo: Disp ., De Virt. Div ., disp. xxv, sect. iii, nn.
These approved writers except from the charge of schism those who refuse submission to the pontiff because of doubts or suspicions regarding his election, and this is precisely the root of Viganò’s rejection of Francis (ie., that The St. Gallen Mafia forced BXVI out, and put their candidate on the throne, thereby violating the norms governing papal elections and invalidating it).
My only point is that when tomorrow the world reports the new “schism” of Vigano for refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of Francis, he would appear to have some considerable firepower in his corner to exonerate him from the charge.
No doubt, tomorrow all the media around the world will report that +Vigano was excommunicated for the crime of schism, for questioning the legitimacy of Francis.
But does questioning the legitimacy of the Roman Pontiff (or papal claimant) always present a clear cut case of schism?
Not according to many approved theologians and canonists.
Here’s what a few of them have to say on the subject:
1. “Finally, those who refuse to obey the Roman Pontiff because they consider his person worthy of suspicion or doubtfully elected cannot be counted among the schismatics…” (Wernz-Vidal: Ius Canonicum , vol. vii, n. 398)
2. “There is no schism if one…refuses obedience to the extent that one…suspects the person of the pope or the validity of his election…” (Szal, Abbot Ignatius: Communication of Catholics with Schismatics , CUA, 1948, p.2)
3. “…is not a schismatic who refuses submission to the pontiff for having probable doubts concerning the legitimacy of his election or his power…” (de Lugo: Disp ., De Virt. Div ., disp. xxv, sect. iii, nn.
These approved writers except from the charge of schism those who refuse submission to the pontiff because of doubts or suspicions regarding his election, and this is precisely the root of Viganò’s rejection of Francis (ie., that The St. Gallen Mafia forced BXVI out, and put their candidate on the throne, thereby violating the norms governing papal elections and invalidating it).
My only point is that when tomorrow the world reports the new “schism” of Vigano for refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of Francis, he would appear to have some considerable firepower in his corner to exonerate him from the charge.
@Sean Johnson Excellent explanation.