Archbishop Viganò digs his own grave, by extravagant statements “I believe that once again, we are seeing play out in real time the destruction of the person and reputation of another outstanding cleric of the Roman Church, since, because he lacks the courage to bring a canonical complaint to the competent tribunal, he is attempting to win his case by public debate and diatribes: a thing which can …More
“I believe that once again, we are seeing play out in real time the destruction of the person and reputation of another outstanding cleric of the Roman Church, since, because he lacks the courage to bring a canonical complaint to the competent tribunal, he is attempting to win his case by public debate and diatribes: a thing which can never succeed, since the Church of Jesus Christ is a juridical entity with proper laws and procedures, and justice must be sought in accord with them. Contrariwise, if the Archbishop changes his legal strategy immediately by publicly appealing to a provincial council against the actions of a dicastery which was erected not by Pope Benedict XVI but by another claiming the papal office during his lifetime, he will put the entire dispute squarely on the proper legal grounds and avoid a charge of schism. For no one appealing to the proper tribunal is a schismatic. He will also in the strongest possible juridical manner put in doubt the claim of Pope Francis to have the right to move against him. In such a case, the Bishops of the Roman Province can decide to call or not call the Council: the charges against Pope Francis being sufficient to hold the Apostolic See impeded (see here fore more about this). If the Bishops were to refuse to convene, then the Archbishop could rightfully appeal to any provincial council in the world, since such a refusal would confirm the juridical doubt concerning the impeded see and a conspiracy to overthrow the Church. Furthermore, even if the provincial council in the Roman province determine against him, he could appeal to other provincial councils, since such decisions put in writing in a provincial council would demonstrate the unjust basis of Pope Francis’ claims to office. This would raise the controversy to the international level and require a general council to hear the case, as numerous provincial councils could rightfully demand such be convened. This is the way to fight as a Catholic in the footsteps of great saints such as St. Athanasius of Alexandria. Let us pray that the Archbishop wake up fast, before he is eaten up by the crocodile on the Tiber.”
((why get thrown out, letting things carry on, when this could actually be the moment to challenge and cause the Holy Church to investigate the legitimacy of PF?))
@Live Mike@JMLFiat "Jesus answered him, I have spoken openly to the world; I ever taught in synagogues, and in the temple, where all the Jews come together; and in secret spake I nothing. Why askest thou me? ask them that have heard me, what I spake unto them: behold, these know the things which I said. And when he had said this, one of the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand, saying,…More
@Live Mike@JMLFiat "Jesus answered him, I have spoken openly to the world; I ever taught in synagogues, and in the temple, where all the Jews come together; and in secret spake I nothing. Why askest thou me? ask them that have heard me, what I spake unto them: behold, these know the things which I said. And when he had said this, one of the officers standing by struck Jesus with his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me? Annas therefore sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest." John 18:20-24
It's as simple as this: if the good Archbishop doesn't recognize the authority of the Holy See, if he refuses filial submission to the canonically elected Supreme Pontiff of the Church (currently Pope Francis), whose valid election as the legitimate Bishop of Rome every single one of the Cardinal-Electors who was present and who participated in the last Papal Conclave have all vouched for - including …More
It's as simple as this: if the good Archbishop doesn't recognize the authority of the Holy See, if he refuses filial submission to the canonically elected Supreme Pontiff of the Church (currently Pope Francis), whose valid election as the legitimate Bishop of Rome every single one of the Cardinal-Electors who was present and who participated in the last Papal Conclave have all vouched for - including Cardinals Sarah, Burke, Brandmüller and Müller, all holy Priests and faithful Shepherds of the Church whose integrity I trust - then it is clear that he is, by definition, in schism. There is no other way to see or define it. It is a sad turn of events and it grieves my heart to say so. But it is nonetheless, true....absolutely true. You cannot break with the duly elected and reigning Successor of Saint Peter and maintain that you are genuinely Catholic, regardless of any dire circumstances or what chaos is occurring in the Church at any given time. You cannot abandon Peter the Rock and the Church that was built upon him, and at the same time, claim to be the Church's defender. It just doesn't work that way. And, I greatly suspect, at one time the Archbishop knew and understood that fundamental principle and infallible dogma of the Church very well, and respected and abided by it. I don't know why or how he has now come to forsake it.
@SonoftheChurch No, it's not that simple. +Vigano recognizes the authority of the Holy See (a requirement of being Catholic). He simply rejects the heretic who occupies Peter's Chair. Submitting to a heretic (have you read Bergoglio's remarks about the Psalms?) is not a vice; it's a virtue. Sarah, Burke, Brandmuller, Muller, etc, etc, etc: ALL assisted in the policy of the conciliar church's policies …More
@SonoftheChurch No, it's not that simple. +Vigano recognizes the authority of the Holy See (a requirement of being Catholic). He simply rejects the heretic who occupies Peter's Chair. Submitting to a heretic (have you read Bergoglio's remarks about the Psalms?) is not a vice; it's a virtue.
Sarah, Burke, Brandmuller, Muller, etc, etc, etc: ALL assisted in the policy of the conciliar church's policies of desacralizing the One True Faith. If they weren't guilty of such, they wouldn't have miters. Only the Conciliar revolutionaries got miters. So, please, spare me (and probably quite a few others) the pom-pom adulations.
