Archbishop Viganò Back In Italy: Confession Not Available Anymore

Everytime Thor's wrong, he resorts to solid bold "headlines" and heavy underlining. It's nothing more than online shouting after he's been shown wrong again.

"The opening post of this thread states that Archbishop Vigano prays for francis so that he becomes Peter."

...the article explicitly said "Pope Francis" not just "Francis". I also linked the article so you could read it. Either you didn't read it or you did and told another falsehood anyway. Which is it, Thor? ;-)

So your conclusion is built on a demonstrably false premise, i.e. an incorrect and abbreviated passage.

"These interpretations are simply the common meaning of what the archbishop says."

..."the common meaning" as defined by Thors Catholic Dictionary. :D You always fabricate this kind of imaginary "support" when you're wrong.

"Everyone knows", "most Catholics can tell", "the common meaning", and so on. You just make this all up as you go. :D

The opening post of this thread states that Archbishop Vigano prays for francis so that he becomes Peter.
Quite obviously then Vigano believes that “francis “ is not Peter and certainly not a pope.
These interpretations are simply the common meaning of what the archbishop says.
The poor deeply confused Vigano now believes that he can turn francis into a valid pope by praying for it to happen.
This is all very very sad.

Avoidable too since the certainty, now widespread, that Pope Benedict’s xvi resignation remains legally INCOMPLETE.

"To say that any alleged incumbent of the Petrine Office is not Peter"

Here's what the article actually said: "Vigano also passed on to Dr. Moynihan that he also prays for Pope Francis"
insidethevatican.com/…/ash-wednesday-w…

So Archbishop Vigano did not say what you claim. Thors Catholic Hammer You're making things up again, Thor, telling lies again, Thor. Pretending your interpretation is fact again, Thor. Just like you do every day, Thor.

"to reveal that he believes Bergoglio is an antipope."

Adding 50% more passive verbs doesn't change a lie, Thor.. Archbishop Vigano did not say he believes that at all. You do that every time you're telling a lie. I'm fascinated you've never changed tactics even when it's constantly debunked.

"We now have two catholic bishops and one Archbishop stating publicly that Francis is not a pope."

This Archbishop isn't saying what you're saying. If anything, Archbishop Vigano explicitly acknowledged Francis as Pope. If he prays for Pope Francis, guess what that makes Francis?

"Add to that the four cardinals and hundreds of theologicans and academics who have accused Francis of heresy and a prima facia case is without doubt now in existence."

Standard Thor Tactic #71: Band-Wagon Fallacy to invent imaginary support, written with passive voice verbs like a news item, in this case fake news.

To say that any alleged incumbent of the Petrine Office is not Peter is to allege by metaphor a bogus pope.
Indeed Viganos credible claims concerning papal apostasy on their own are sufficient to reveal that he believes Bergoglio is an antipope.
We now have two catholic bishops and one Archbishop stating publicly that Francis is not a pope.

Add to that the four cardinals and hundreds of theologicans and academics who have accused Francis of heresy and a prima facia case is without doubt now in existence.
But can Catholics hang about while a manifest heretic like francis wields his wrecking ball?
I say no.

"it can only mean..." Wrong again Thors Catholic Hammer Your self-serving interpretation is not an absolute. Vigano uses "Peter" as a metaphor for the Papal ideal.

"Vigano thinks that alleged occupant is NOT PETER."

That's self-evident. Pope Francis isn't Pope Peter. He isn't Pius or Leo or Marcellus, either.

In this context, only someone who is already Pope could ever aspire to the standard set by the first Pope Christ chose. Meaning, Vigano's metaphor presupposes Francis is Pope..

Gotcha! :D

I love it when you try using reason to argue to a conclusion. It always ends badly.

It's your own fault, Thor. That's what comes from resorting to bad rhetoric based on repetition and falsehoods. You've simply forgotten how to reason and I'm generously assuming you once did.

Try again, Crackers... this time without the No True Scotsman fallacy about "only idiots and fools would think otherwise". Even your nasty jibe is a fallacy. You can't even do that right. ;-)

Archbishop Vigano effectively states that “Francis” is not a pope.
He is indeed correct

So in Viganos strange head the See of Peter is vacant.
Like a whole bunch of deluded Catholics Vigano accepts the false imperfect resignation of pope Benedict as valid.
Ah well.