Vatican excommunicates Viganò for schism

Archbishop Carlo Viganò. | Credit: Edward Pentin/National Catholic Register

Rome Newsroom, Jul 5, 2024 / 09:35 am (CNA).

The Vatican has officially excommunicated Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith announced Friday.

Viganò was found guilty of the canonical crime, or delict, of schism, or the refusal to submit to the pope or the communion of the Church, at the conclusion of the Vatican’s extrajudicial penal process on July 4.

The Vatican’s doctrine office announced the “latae sententiae” excommunication (automatic excommunication) on July 5, citing Viganò’s “public statements manifesting his refusal to recognize and submit to the Supreme Pontiff, his rejection of communion with the members of the Church subject to him, and of the legitimacy and magisterial authority of the Second Vatican Council.”

The former papal nuncio to the United States is now excommunicated, the most serious penalty a baptized person can incur, which consists of being placed outside the communion of the faithful of the Catholic Church and denied access to the sacraments.

The ruling comes after Viganò defied a Vatican summons to appear before the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith to face charges of schism last week.

The former Vatican diplomat — who garnered headlines in 2018 for alleging that senior Church officials covered up abuses committed by former cardinal Theodore McCarrick — has repeatedly rejected the authority of Pope Francis since then and has called on him to resign.

In a lengthy statement shared on social media June 28, Viganò accused Pope Francis of “heresy and schism” over his promotion of COVID-19 vaccines and his overseeing of the 2018 Vatican-China deal on the appointment of bishops.

He also said he has “no reason to consider myself separate from communion with the holy Church and with the papacy, which I have always served with filial devotion and fidelity.”

“I maintain that the errors and heresies to which [Francis] adhered before, during, and after his election, along with the intention he held in his apparent acceptance of the papacy, render his elevation to the throne null and void,” Viganò wrote.

Viganò, who has been in hiding for years, announced on social media June 20 that he had been summoned to Rome to answer formal charges of schism.

The specific charges outlined against Viganò, according to a document he himself posted, involved making public statements that allegedly deny the fundamental elements necessary to maintain communion with the Catholic Church. This included denying the legitimacy of Pope Francis as the rightful pontiff and the outright rejection of the Second Vatican Council.

In response to the charges, Viganò said in a June 21 statement that he had not sent any materials in his defense to the Vatican, noting that he did not recognize the authority of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith “nor that of its prefect, nor that of the person who appointed him.”

Viganò’s excommunication can only be lifted by the Apostolic See.


If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.


About Catholic News Agency 13106 Articles
Catholic News Agency (www.catholicnewsagency.com)

163 Comments

    • Vigano was a coward for refusing to go to the DDF where he could have, in person, shown Tucho and the Pope where they were wrong!

      Instead, he continued to hide himself and ultimately declared he does not recognize the dicastery, neither Tucho nor the Pope who appointed him.

      Vigano schism-ized himself. He expected this excommunication and it was given him.

      • You don’t know any of that, of how the deck might have been stacked, of how he would even have had a voice or if he would have had to endure a Marxist show trial that Francis so admires. We don’t know, and it’s not exactly brave to presume from afar what we do not know.

        • We may not know all that, but if Vigano had the courage of his convictions, he would have gone. Padre Pio went. Don Dolindo Ruotolo went. But Vigano continued to hide.

          There are a few Cardinals and Bishops and laypeople who criticize the pope, but they don’t denounce him. But Vigano did and effectively severed himself from the Church. I think denouncing the pope is ground enough for excommunication. Vigano asked for it, so he was given it.

          • Denouncing Francis, a man unabmbuously guilty of crimes against humanity, is not grounds for excommunication.
            A refusal ro recognize his crimes, aids and abets his crimes.

      • Margarita, come to your senses. Do you think for a minute that his going to Rome would have been anything more than a show trial? You underestimate the evil that is going on with this pontificate.

        • The Fathers of the Church are unanimous. There is no excuse for Schism even upon the admission the Church is now being ruled by wicked and sinful men. If hypothetically Pope Francis God forbid goes to Hell for being a really really really bad Pope(and Francis is bad at his job no question) then Vigano will likely join him in he Pit for becoming a Sede.

          Bruke, Schneider and Cardinal Zen are critics of this Pope. They don’t schism or deny a lawful Ecumenical Council. Even Archbishop Schneider who holds a critical view of Vatican II doesn’t go that far.

          Sorry Vigano shot his cred in the ‘ed.

          • Lawful Ecumenical Council??? By what law is there a requirement to accept some of the anti-Catholic insipidness from the Council?
            How foolish does anyone have to be to believe this opening of Dignitatis Humanae: “A sense of the dignity of the human person has been impressing itself more and more deeply on the consciousness of contemporary man,”
            That idiocy less than 20 years after WWII.
            And it is shortsighted to insist that there is no basis for doubting the legitimacy of Francis as pope: One can disagree, but not be dismissive of Vigano’s objections.

            Additions to Canon Law instituted by JPII:
            Universi Dominici Gregis is one of the Canons that was created to govern conclaves.

            “76. Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected.”
            CHAPTER VI
            MATTERS TO BE OBSERVED OR AVOIDED IN THE ELECTION OF THE ROMAN PONTIFF
            78. If — God forbid — in the election of the Roman Pontiff the crime of simony were to be perpetrated, I decree and declare that all those guilty thereof shall incur excommunication latae sententiae…
            81. The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition…
            82. I likewise forbid the Cardinals before the election to enter into any stipulations, committing themselves of common accord to a certain course of action should one of them be elevated to the Pontificate. These promises too, should any in fact be made, even under oath, I also declare null and void.
            Incidentally, the honor of God trump’s the status of any and all within the Church. The only reason for the Church’s existence is to be God’s instrument for bringing humanity from its sinful state to salvation, which includes honoring God’s natural law, which means in large part that right is right no matter who or how many are wrong, and wrong is wrong no matter who or how few are right. If a pope does evil, like aiding and abetting mass murder, he merits condemnation in equal measure to the nature of the evil performed. If a serial murderer preforms an act of benevolence, it is an act of benevolence no matter how revolting his life might be otherwise.
            No one owes loyalty to intrinsic evil. It is evil to believe one does owe loyalty to evil.

          • A very strong opinion, dear JtS.

            Who goes to hell depends completely on what our eternal King Jesus Christ says to them: either: “Depart from Me . . .” or (what we all want to hear): “Well done . . .” Just as a shepherd separates goats from sheep.

            The New Testament makes it abundantly clear that our obedience to King Jesus Christ is the only criterion He employs in determining our eternal destiny.

            No one but Jesus, Himself can say if PF or AV have listened to Him & done what He commands.

            Our Master instructs us not to judge, for fear of being judged.
            So, dear JtS, let’s never be so bold as to think we know the eternal destination of anyone.

            That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t rebuke PF for his anti-Apostolic & pornocratic words and decisions. It doesn’t mean we can’t rebuke AV for some of his wilder statements and actions.

            Saint Paul tells us that, as Christ’s servants, we should be deferring to each other, in love. Something for PF & AV & all of us to meditate on, maybe?

            Ever in the love of The Lamb; blessings from marty

        • I just saw a video clip of Lefebvre yesterday in which he was warning of the dire consequences to France of Islamic immigration. I am really trying hard to agree with you that he and Vigano are worse than the hundreds of bishops over the last fifty years who have said nothing on this important topic, or worse yet, like Francis, demand even more liberal policies. It’s just one issue, albeit a big one, but there are many others where the schismatics are much better than more than 90% of the bishops in full Communion with Rome, to say nothing of the current Pope. Vigano and Lefebvre should have not crossed the line, but the responsibility of those who have pushed them and many others to that point is grave.

    • Am sorry that Archbishop Vigano refused to carry his cross of obedience and chose schism. Am praying that he will publicly repent (assuming he is even alive). There is no Pope Vigano.

      “For those who defend authority against rebellion must not themselves rebel.” Tolkien, The Silmarillion

    • The Catholic Church has been going through a very dark period under this current Pope. This is just another example for which I reject and condemn the church hierarchy. I don’t care what their “schism” policy is. What I do care about is Godly men (like Vigano) preaching the truth, saving souls, and being fishers of men — not money and power.

      • Most are with you on that and the ones that can’t see it must have only been paying attention to this horrific mainstream media where some days 100% of what they sasy are lies.

        • Well said, both Margaret and Dennis.

          All I can contribute is to say that years of studying the 27 books of our New Testament has given me a shield against the lies of the world and the lies within the Church.

          As a Catholic, I’m impressed that the guide-book for our Church – that is The Catechism of the Catholic Church – is rock-solid with over 3,500 citations from The New Testament.

          King Jesus Christ has not left us without protection from lies without and lies within.

          Faith supported by The New Testament is unshakeable, unbreakable & unbeatable.

          Ever in the love of The LORD; blessings from marty

          • And yet, or moreover, here’s a tangent on the Catholic Church as essentially Eucharistic (as we agree), and not essentially a “people of the book” with 3,500 citations in the Catechism…

            Three points and a Summary:

            FIRST, some Muslim scholars (Islam: a sola Scriptura “people of the book”), have sometimes considered more fully encircling other peoples of the book—not only the Qur’an’s expropriated parts of the Pentateuch and of the New Testament, but also some recognition of the Hindu veda and the Buddhist suttas (Pali) or sutras (Sanskrit).

            So, as a rough parallel, what could it mean—in the exaggerated “spirit of Vatican II”?—when the Instrumentum laboris for the Synod on Synodality proposes: “…As a model of consultation and listening, it is proposed that Church assemblies be held at all levels, trying to widen consultation to include the contribution of other Churches and ecclesial Communities, of other religions [!] present in the local context and of society [!], with which the Christian community journeys [!]” (n. 94)?

            SECOND, within an indefinite “pluralism of religions,” how can we still assume that big-tent theologians will distinguish the distinct and universal natural law from the more blurred grasping(s) for transcendence manifested in natural religions? Religions still uninformed about the distinct, historical, singular, and alarmingly supernatural and Self-disclosing (!) event of the Incarnation? And, thereafter of the “listening” Mystical Body of Christ assembled by the sacramental Real Presence (CCC 1374)?

            THIRD, so, about the Instrumental laboris’ and its language of geographic regions and levels—”local, national, continental consultations”—and now on “other religions present in the local context and of society”…Context? How vulnerable is this terrestrial outreach to a leveling and dilution of human nature, of the two natures in the one person of Jesus Christ, of the nature and contours of His divinely instituted Church, and even of the divine nature of the Triune One?

            SUMMARY: To characterize probably unfairly: in its 20,000 words, the Instrumentum laboris mentions synods 228 times and “Jesus Christ” only once (!), and “Jesus” a comparatively sparse 16 times. So, about an ever-more diffuse synodality–within a “polyhedral” or “inverted-pyramid” (c)hurch–How to still “listen” truly: with heightened and deepened fidelity to the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church?

  1. And yet Marko Rupnik and James Martin SCH are still members in good standing. Woe to those who call good evil and evil good.

      • Dear Margarita: “At any rate, it’s over.”
        Drawing a parallel with Saint Athanasius – it may only have just have begun.

        • Have you ever read anything by St. Athanasius? Vigano is more parallel to Milingo, or even to Martin Luther.

          But it seems many of the people commenting on this mag are effectively Protestants, so maby that’s a fit. After all, even the Council of Trent agreed with Luther that the selling of indulgences was wrong, so he had something in his favor … just not enough.

          • Have you ever read Luther and Francis to identify an honest parallel? A seat of authority can be as opposed to the authority of Christ and His Church as any childish fallible arrogant blowhard.

      • Of course it’s not over. It won’t be over until we see white smoke emerge from the chimney of the Sistine chapel and the next Pope on the balcony of St. Peter’s. What we have is another Babylonian Captivity – the Church is being held hostage.

    • It is a grave Scandal and God might judge the Pope for punishing Vigano and not punishing Martin and Company. No question. However that doesn’t excuse Vigano.

    • I agree with you on this.
      The Pope seems to be tolerant of some very deviant behavior from his favorites but does not take kindly any criticism

  2. We cannot leave the Barque of Peter. It only leads to division, and a prime example of this are the various Eastern Orthodox churches, some of whom aren’t even in communion with each other. I agree with Vigano’s views on abortion and the covid vaccine, but I cannot support Vigano and his schismatic views on our (validly) elected Pope and the second Vatican council, which ironically laid the groundwork for the reunification efforts with the schismatic Orthodox Churches.

    • Didn’tThinkSo, maybe, just maybe, it is this validly elected Pope who has become schismatic (cf his worship of the false Pachamama god).

      • “Validly elected”? . . you mean: politically manipulated through the St. Galen “Mafia”. All this still has seriously to be re-visited and
        weighed and pronounced on by “Competent Authority”.

      • When you remove the first stitch the sweater will come apart. Scripture tells us that we must respect authority even when it is abusive. It’s better to follow a bad Pope than to become your own pope. There is only one key to the door and Francis is the one holding it.

    • The problem with your position is that one cannot follow a heretical pope and remain in the Barque of Peter at the same time.

      • Good comment, dear Anna.

        Yet, one might wonder how many good, practicing Catholics actually ‘follow this pope’ in any meaningful or substantial way.

        Is it possible that all his hyped-up, publicity-seeking, ‘song & dance routines’ are – on a day-to-day basis – of zero significance to real followers of our LORD Jesus Christ?

        These mischievous rebels in Rome think they’re making a massive difference.
        Probably not!

        What would make a massive difference for all Catholics is if Rome issued an edict of self-excommunication for every cleric who indulged in pornography, molested a child, abused a vulnerable adult, or furthered a clerical culture of homosexuality.

        It would also make a tremendous difference for everyone in the Church if Rome insisted every cleric – from Pope down to deacon – return to daily saying, singing, & refelecting on the Catholic Breviary, that is The Daily Office.
        It would give us clergy who are learned in Christ’s Word and full of prayer.

        Today’s pope & far too many clergy are largely ignorant of the actual reality of Christ & deficient of any proper prayer life.
        Are not all such are failed leaders, unqualified to shepherd God’s flock?

        This appalling situaltion is not ‘fixed-in-stone’ and it could be fixed by a reforming pope & leaders who’re obedient to Christ & full of His Holy Spirit.

        As Moses exhorted: “Today, I set before you LIFE & DEATH – so choose LIFE!”

        Ever longing for the return of King Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty

      • Anna, there is no problem with my position. I only stated that we cannot leave the Barque of Peter. Vigano does not appear to recognize Francis as our divinely chosen Pope. This is a heresy. Look at Martin Luther and Henry VIII. They rejected the authority of the Pope, and that’s precisely what Vigano has done. Look how far it got them. Two heretical religions developed because the authority of the Pope was rejected. I’m not the biggest fan of Pope Francis, but I would rather stand with the valid successor of Peter and remain in communion with Rome than stand with a schismatic, excommunicated Cardinal, even if said Cardinal is more conservative than Francis. The Holy Spirit guides the Church and the faithful. Francis is our divinely chosen, validly elected Pope with full authority. We should trust and respect God’s decision to have made Francis our Pope. Let’s remain faithful Catholics in union with Rome.

        • From The Holy Spirit Does Not Choose the Pope

          Dr. Jared Staudt

          Excerpt:

          It’s amazing how many times I’ve heard from fellow Catholics that they think that God directly chooses the pope. Just yesterday someone said that they refused to criticize the pope because he was given to the Church by the Holy Spirit. The Church does not teach that position. According to the laws of the Church, the Cardinals choose the pope while praying for the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

          If you don’t believe me, just listen to a previous pope, Benedict XVI. While still Cardinal Ratzinger, he was asked by Bavarian television in 1997 if the Holy Spirit is responsible for the election of a pope. His answer:

          “I would not say so, in the sense that the Holy Spirit picks out the Pope. . . . I would say that the Spirit does not exactly take control of the affair, but rather like a good educator, as it were, leaves us much space, much freedom, without entirely abandoning us. Thus the Spirit’s role should be understood in a much more elastic sense, not that he dictates the candidate for whom one must vote. Probably the only assurance he offers is that the thing cannot be totally ruined. . . . There are too many contrary instances of popes the Holy Spirit obviously would not have picked!”

          • Ok, I read about that shortly ago on Catholic Answers. Thanks Flynn.
            My main point in this comment section is to implore everyone to stay in union with the Pope of Rome. That should never be a controversial stance.

          • Well, the Holy Spirit does not choose a president either, or our boss for that matter. Authority does not require a purely supernatural decision to be valid. I dare say not a single decision you have ever made has been “supernatural” and purely the result of the Holy Spirit, including, if you are married, your choice of spouse; yet some of your decisions are still authorative.

          • Of course the Holy Spirit doesn’t directly pick the Pope. He uses human agents, and they choose the new pope with their free cooperation with grace. The Church MEDIATES God’s grace, salvation and holiness.
            Jesus chose to use the Church of which he is the head and we are the members to give us his divine life through the sacraments, through grace. It is made up of SINNERS! Every single one, including the Pope.
            The pope is the successor of St. Peter. To St. Peter and his successors Jesus gave supreme authority over the Church. It has a hierarchy. It is not a democracy.
            St. Peter denied Jesus THREE TIMES and this after Jesus had made him the head. We don’t obey and respect the Holy Father only when WE think he is worth our obedience.
            Whether someone is censured or not has no relevance on someone else who one thinks should be. Perhaps we would all do well to spend more time examining our own consciences and pray for those who seem to be leading others astray. Really pray for their conversion as well as our own.

        • Thanks. It’s somewhat analogous to the old joke, “What do you call the guy who graduated at the bottom of his class in medical school?” “Doctor.”

        • You remarked “but I would rather stand with the valid successor of Peter and remain in communion with Rome than stand with a schismatic, excommunicated Cardinal, even if said Cardinal is more conservative than Francis.”

          There’s is no need to take sides here between the Pope and Vigano, regardless of how strongly people’s feelings are running and how polarized the discussion has become. As Catholics, we do not have to “choose our team” whenever a dispute involving the Pope breaks out. And I am speaking as a sports fan who is attached to several teams and kniws what it is to support a team. The Catholic faith is rooted in Jesus Christ and therefore transcends all wordly teams, or should.

          I agree that as Catholics, we should stay in communion with Rome. But I do not understand why you believe stayng in communion with Rome is necessarily tied to a need to “stand with the Pope.” Stand with the Pope against what, exactly? That suggests showing a degree of personal loyalty and support for a Pope that is not necessary to remain in communion. So as you’ve phrased it, I can’t agree with you. We aren’t required to agree with all of a Pope’s actions or to support them, or to take his side against challengers such as Vigano or even to like him.

          If you are truly only trying to emphasize thst Catholics should remain in the Barque of Peter, maybe it would be better to drop the references suggesting that to do that, we must also “stand with the Pope.” Similarly, comments indicating that God choose the Pope and therefore, our attitude toward a particular Pope is tied to whether we respect God’s decision. They may express your feelings but they aren’t binding on anyone else.

          • You’ve pointed out some good things Amanda. My main point in this comment section is to remain in communion with Rome, and to reject Vigano because he rejected the authority of our Pope, which is a schismatic action.
            Popes aren’t perfect, thank God, and they make mistakes too, and yes, Francis has said things that I don’t agree with, but he is the valid successor of Peter, and for Vigano to reject his authority is something that I cannot in good faith support. I’m done with this comment section. I urge everyone to remain in communion with Rome and the Chair of Peter.

        • To “jump ship” from a counterfeit papacy, is, in essence, to remain in communion with The One Body Of Christ.

          “You cannot be My disciples if you do not remain in My Word.”

        • It’ll leave you in an ocean outside of full communion with the Catholic Church, akin to the Orthodox. Jumping ship is not an option. We must stay in union with Rome. I know there is a deacon and a priest who frequently comment on CWR, do they believe that we must stay in union with the Pope of Rome? God bless, everyone and stay close to the unified Church, stay in union.

          • Or outside the Barque of Peter when judgement fall? Thanks, Martin Luther! Though I don’t recommend it.

      • You can acknowledge a heretical Pope to be Pope, and cheerfully point out that he has never made an ex cathedra statement and probably never will. Or that if he did, it is somewhat questionable whether anyone would be able to interpret it correctly. Other teachings have no authority if they clearly contradict Tradition, or if they are simply uninterpretable. You’re basically left with: Yeah, that’s definitely a sheepdog, but whenever he ignores the shepherd or chases his own tail, we ignore him.

        The problem with having a bad Pope has always been the scandal it has given, and the difficulty it creates, both emotional and practical, in remaining in communion with St. Peter’s See. The worse it gets, the more people it catches who otherwise would have remained faithful.

  3. Can a gaggle of vindictive prelates, directed by a materially heretical Pope, who appears contemptuous of the Catholic religion without inhibition, perform a valid excommunication?

      • It is shortsighted to insist that there is no basis for doubting the legitimacy of Francis as pope: You can disagree, but not be insulting of Vigano’s objections.

        Additions to Canon Law instituted by JPII:

        Universi Dominici Gregis is one of the Canons that was created to govern conclaves:

        “76. Should the election take place in a way other than that prescribed in the present Constitution, or should the conditions laid down here not be observed, the election is for this very reason null and void, without any need for a declaration on the matter; consequently, it confers no right on the one elected.”

        CHAPTER VI
        MATTERS TO BE OBSERVED OR AVOIDED IN THE ELECTION OF THE ROMAN PONTIFF
        78. If — God forbid — in the election of the Roman Pontiff the crime of simony were to be perpetrated, I decree and declare that all those guilty thereof shall incur excommunication latae sententiae…
        81. The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition…
        82. I likewise forbid the Cardinals before the election to enter into any stipulations, committing themselves of common accord to a certain course of action should one of them be elevated to the Pontificate. These promises too, should any in fact be made, even under oath, I also declare null and void.

        Incidentally, the honor of God trump’s the status of any and all within the Church. The only reason for the Church’s existence is to be God’s instrument for bringing humanity from its sinful state to salvation, which includes honoring God’s natural law, which means in large part that right is right no matter WHO or how many are wrong, and wrong is wrong no matter WHO or how few are right. If a pope does evil, like aiding and abetting mass murder, he merits condemnation in equal measure to the nature of the evil performed. If a serial murderer preforms an act of benevolence, it is an act of benevolence no matter how revolting his life might be otherwise.

        No one owes loyalty to intrinsic evil. It is evil to believe one does owe loyalty to evil.

    • Yes, if the Papacy is valid and legit. No, if he’s not.

      Still, you have to show us proofs of your authority to declare the Pope is a material heretic. By what authority do you say he is?

      • Any baptized Catholic has the authority to judge material heresy in any other Catholic. Your contention that I do not have the authority speaks to the enforced ignorance among today’s Catholics. Formal heresy declarations are for ecclesial proceedings.
        And how many dozens upon dozens of citations of material heresy by Francis need I list? Should I begin with his denial of immutable truth or his belief that God is unsure of himself and changes His mind a lot as He learns from His creation? From there we can go on to his denial of the divinity of Christ or the sinlessness of Mary.

      • By the authority that is found in The Deposit of Faith that Christ entrusted to His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, we can know through both Faith and reason, grounded in The Deposit of Faith the difference between a Gospel preached for Christ, and a gospel that is preached against Christ.

        “For the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter that by His revelation they might make known new doctrine, but that by His assistance they might inviolably keep and faithfully expound the Revelation, the Deposit of Faith, delivered through the Apostles. ”

        Our Call to Holiness is a Call to be Temples of The Holy Ghost. A validly elected Pope would never reject Our Call to be a Temple Of The Holy Ghost. Jorge Bergoglio, by this statement alone, made while a cardinal rejecting God’s Universal Call to Holiness, ipso facto separated himself from Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church:
        This is what Jorge Bergoglio stated.
        prior to his election as pope, on page 117 of his book, On Heaven And Earth, demonstrating that he does not hold, keep, or teach The Catholic Faith, and he continues to act accordingly:
        “If there is a union of a private nature, there is neither a third party, nor is society affected. Now, if the union is given the category of marriage, there could be children affected. Every person needs a male father and a female mother that can help shape their identity.”- Jorge Bergoglio, denying The Sanctity of the marital act within The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and the fact that God, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, Is The Author Of Love, Of Life, And Of Marriage, while denying sin done in private is sin.
        Where in The Deposit Of Faith did Christ withdraw His Universal Call to Holiness?

      • Isn’t supporting, protecting, and blessing sexual abuse and homosexuality heretical, because Francis has done all those things and more.

    • You are right, dear EJB:
      PF, CF and co-travellers are themselves in a state of auto-excommunication through manifest bad faith, by giving Holy Communion to public advocates of infanticide, through teaching against the clear instructions of our LORD Jesus Christ & His founding Apostles, & through fostering a culture of pornography & sexual promiscuity.

      AV – despite his imperfections – is better qualified to excommunicate than they are!

      If the excommunicated excommunicate us, is that not a confirmation of our communion?

  4. Well Vatican II certainly ended in a debate debacle which I suppose became more and more of a tangled web due to the fact that it was no longer considered to be Loving or Merciful to use The Charitable Anathema for a multitude of our beloved prodigal sons and daughters.

    That being said, why do I feel as though this tangled web is being untied as we speak, given the fact that by this particular excommunication, I have only lost faith in this particular anti -Papacy, retaining both my mind and my Faith?

    Such is the essence of Truth and of Love.

    Dear Blessed Mother Mary, Mirror of Justice , Untier Of Knots, And Destroyer Of All Heresy, Who Through Your Fiat, Affirmed The Filioque, and thus the fact that There Is Only One Son Of God, One Word Of God Made Flesh, One Lamb Of God Who Can Taketh Away The Sins Of The World, Our Only Savior, Jesus The Christ, thus there can only be, One Spirit Of Perfect Complementary Love Between The Father And The Son, Who Must Proceed From Both The Father And The Son, In The Ordered Communion Of Perfect Complementary Love, The Most Holy And Undivided Blessed Trinity (Filioque), hear our Prayer that your Immaculate Heart Will Triumph soon for the sake of Christ, His Church, all who will come to believe, and all our beloved prodigal sons and daughters, who, hopefully, will return to The One Body Of Christ, Through The Unity Of The Holy Ghost(Filioque).

  5. This is a sad story. There is so much wrong on all sides in my opinion, which I freely admit could be wrong due to lack of facts.
    In humble prayer I seek blessings be upon Archbishop Viganò and the Holy Catholic Church.

  6. Recall well that reported in DER SPIEGEL by Walter Mayr on December 23, 2016, this comment made by Pope Francis to a small of colleagues “It is not to be excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church.” This is two years before Archbishop Viganò began his public examination of the state of the Church. It stirred quite the dust at the time. The writing was on the wall eight years ago, but it wasn’t Viganò in his hand.

  7. My prayers are with the Archbishop, that God’s merciful love may prevail.
    From Viganò’s conscientious perspective considering what he may have gleaned from personal contact he may possess what he honestly believes substantiates his accusations. A consideration of the legitimacy of Archbishop Viganò’s allegation, likely based on the Papal Coronation Oath, where Viganò said, “I maintain that the errors and heresies to which [Francis] adhered before, during, and after his election, along with the intention he held in his apparent acceptance of the papacy, render his elevation to the throne null and void”, may be examined in the wording of the Oath.
    The Papal Coronation Oath: “I vow to change nothing of the received Tradition, and nothing thereof I have found before me guarded by my God-pleasing predecessors, to encroach upon, to alter, or to permit any innovation therein; To the contrary: with glowing affection as her truly faithful student and successor, to safeguard reverently the passed-on good, with my whole strength and utmost effort”.
    Although we may surmise that a pope did not intend to adhere to the oath, it doesn’t appear feasible that it can be canonically proven. Although, can it be morally proved? As Fr Thomas Weinandy OFM Cap recently argued in his article Pride and Prejudice, It’s not what Francis says, it’s what he does. Others have said the same. And many have identified errors and have refused to follow them. And thankfully so. And significantly, a number of clergy have been warning the faithful of the dire consequences in carrying out what some of Pope Francis’ remarks, writings, and actions suggest.

    • From Pride and Prejudice

      Fr. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM, Cap.
      Tuesday, July 2, 2024

      Excerpt:

      Robert McElroy, the bishop of San Diego, who was made a Cardinal by Pope Francis while the archbishops of San Francisco and Los Angeles were passed over, has also issued revisionist statements about homosexual acts, implying that, given what we have now learned from the social sciences concerning human nature, homosexuality needs to be doctrinally and pastorally reconsidered.

      Likewise, Fr. James Martin, S.J., a close confidant of Pope Francis, has for many years been a supporter of gay culture. Pope Francis has met with and even applauded the leadership of New Ways Ministry, a group condemned by the Vatican decades ago and further criticized by the USCCB in 2010 for its pro-gay advocacy.

    • Thank you, dear Fr Peter for these relevant facts.

      It seems there is evidence Jorge Bergoglio was elected after debarring machinations; took his oath of office in bad faith; then – heavily disguished by pr as a legitimate pope – proceeded to act against the commands of our LORD Jesus Christ and against the teachings of His Apostles (that is against The Catholic Church).

      If that’s even half true, AV is lawful in saying there is currently no legitimate papal authority in Rome.

      CWR needs an article by one or more competent canon lawyers to help explicate this.

      Ever in the grace & mercy of King Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty

    • About the “vow to change nothing of the received Tradition,” what does it mean when the Tradition is reaffirmed, but carve-out exceptions are then seemingly compartmentalized in the mind? Not a “change”?

      Four points:

      FIRST, one is reminded of a homosexual cardinal who, when he was asked whether he had violated a former accuser of sexual abuse, did not say “no”; but instead “I have never violated my vow of chastity.” Meaning that chastity applies only to men and women together.

      SECOND, what are we to make of Veritatis Splendor (VS) and Natural Law and moral absolutes, as now part of Tradition (!): “This is the first time, in fact, that the Magisterium of the Church [!] has set forth in detail the fundamental elements of this [‘moral’] teaching, and presented the principles for the pastoral discernment necessary in practical and cultural situations which are complex and even crucial” (VS, n. 115).

      THIRD, the globally divisive Fiducia Supplicans makes no mention anywhere of Veritatis Splendor. But again, is the supposedly “non-liturgical” crypto-blessing of “irregular couples” sufficiently oblique to sidestep a “change” in formal Tradition, even while “walking together” with the zeitgeist?

      FOURTH, so “schism,” but not more. And, Vigano and the Vatican, both, seem to have left some chips on the table—about governance, complex prudential judgments of engagement, silences, informal signaling, and the overall principle (?) of Gradualism (see Vigano: Open Letter, June 20, 2024).

      Possibly overstated, or possibly clarified instead by Dignitas Infinita, or not, but still worthy of factual “dialogue”?

  8. But wait…there’s the difference between the “real” Vatican II of the Documents, and Hans Kung’s “virtual” Vatican II marketed by his talking-head media (Benedict’s terms). About the Documents, the angels are in the details.

    A “schismatic,” and likely Vigano’s intended this outcome. But what are we to say, then, about the 400,000 in Germany who refused to be fleeced by the Church-tax last year alone, and who now are automatically excommunicated from the German near-schism/heresy of der Synodal Weg—for “apostasy”?

    In the big dance, methinks the Vigano episode could (“could”) now serve as a useful signal to the more wayward and Kungian Marx, Kasper, Batzing & Co.

    In any event, Vigano’s litany of grievances can stand by itself and apart from his overreaching accusations. Are we reminded of Luther’s 95 Theses at Wittenberg, before the tin-cup-indulgences thingy also escalated and morphed into a heresy about all works—and then into a simplifying Canon Law showdown?

    SUMMARY: For the “non-synod” in Germania, thank ewe for shearing.

  9. The title is wrong. The Vatican ruled that Vigano excommunicated himself. It’s the same difference as a doctor pronouncing a man who has shot himself in the head to be dead and a doctor killing the man, except that the dead man is unlikely to insist that he is, in fact, actually alive.

    • Dear ‘Outis’: “Vigano excommunicated himself”.

      If it IS possible for a practicing Catholic to excommunicate themselves by perceiving the non-papal character of the rebels against Apostolic Catholicism who have been fomenting in Rome, then’re are hundreds of millions of practicing Catholics, all around the world, who are excommunicating themselves!

      Yes, AV is imperfect but, sad to say, his discernment of the anti-Apostolic character of our current Church leadership is well based on facts.

      Ever seeking to hear & follow Jesus Christ, our True Shepherd; blessings from marty

        • Let’s examine the issue as a matter of conscience this way. If Pope Francis were to implore me to bless a homosexual couple based on the teaching of Fiducia Supplicans, and I refused, would I be morally culpable of refusing papal authority?
          Similarly, if I refused Joe Biden the Holy Eucharist, would that defy papal doctrine contained in Amoris Laetitia Ch 8 regarding concrete circumstances, the penitent’s conscience? Would my refusal make any difference if Pope Francis were standing there and ordered me to give Biden communion? Who would be disobedient to the higher authority, myself or the Pope?

          • But Fiducia Supplicans does not require any priest to bless anything, does it?

            And your blesssing might be “God lead you to repentence.”

          • Fr. asked IF he were required to do such and so what would be the consequence. You Ricko, changed the premise.

            Also, in changing the premise you misdirect what the problems would be in FS AND misdirect how Fr.’s question could help in and lead into uncovering that.

            Same for AL which you dodged.

          • Yes Ricko. If the homosexual person, persons, or couple manifest a disposition to at least reconsider their homosexual practice I would gladly bless their disposition.
            Otherwise I would not offer a blessing that would be interpreted as a validation of their sin. Blessings are not magic. We must show a willingness, as with all the sacraments, to cooperate with the grace given to initiate repentance and salvation.

            Yes indeed Ricko. If the homosexual person, persons, or couple manifest a disposition to at least reconsider their homosexual practice I would gladly bless their disposition.
            Otherwise I would not offer a blessing that would be interpreted as a validation of their sin. Blessings are not magic. We must show a willingness to cooperate with the grace given.

      • There’s plenty of room in the barque of schism for Vigano, for you, and for “Father” Peter Morello (if “call no man father” applies to ANYONE, it certainly applies to oneself!).

        You can call yourself Ph.D. or Dr. for what I care. I have a Ph.D. in physics. It matters as little as yours does in this kind of conversation, which is to say, not at all.

        • I have a Doctorate in phisics, and from what I’ve witnessed from you over time, I suspect you’re faking it, especially given your silly need to disparage one of the two most intelligent contributors to this forum. Were you not so ignorant of history, you would even know Christ made reference to a particular circumstance of inappropriate deference. But I suppose you called your father father. A knowledge of theology and eclesial history does matter “in this conversation.”
          And the logic of a non-physicist pretending to be one, would be able to declare that a man killing himself can not be innocent of a false claim of having killed himself while he’s actually still alive.

      • But you’re missing the point. THE VATICAN MAKES NO CLAIM OF HAVING EXCOMMUNICATED VIGANO. The Vatican claims he excommunicated himself. He claims otherwise, as apparentlydo you and Peter Morello, who calls himself Father. (Because respect to a Pope is optional, but respect to someone on the Internet who says he is a priest is MANDATORY.)

  10. Now the pope can issue a new document which authorizes priests to give blessings to excommunicated individuals and couples.

    • No, Andrew Angelo, not a new document from the pope. Close but no cigar…

      Instead, might a minority report from the Synod on Synodality suggest that individual hierarchies or even individual bishops within a polyhedral Church can experiment with non-ordained deaconesses? And, then, that under the globally too- divisive Fiducia Supplicans, these non-ordained deaconesses can be the ones to offer the “non-liturgical,” “spontaneous” and “non-scandalous” non-blessings to “irregular” couples, as “couples”?

      Be the first to welcome unisex Gradualism into your diocese and neighborhood parish!

      Later, might it be suggested that deaconesses might be ordained after all, a suggestion probably from just another couple: the archdeaconess Jeannine Gramick and Jiminy-Cricket Martin, S.J.? A church (lower case) within a Church, and therefore not schismatic? Down with ecclesial colonialism!

      SUMMARY: A metastatic “growth” within the Church, as in secular society where civil unions were a half-way house toward quarantining binary marriage within gender theory, as a special case alongside “gay marriage”?

  11. Revisiting the 2016 quotation of bergoglio reported in DER SPIEGEL by Walter Mayr on December 23, 2016, “It is not to be excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church.”, previous popes would have done everything in their power, even gladly accepting martyrdom to defend the Faith before seeing the Church torn asunder as happened in Luther’s time. I would, without question, take this statement, in light of everything that bergoglio has not only subsequently said and done, but failed to do during this sad folly of a pontificate, as tacit evidence that he never intended to fulfill the papal vows. In fact, I think he made this statement as a challenge to anyone who might try and stop him.
    No pope has yet been deposed, but with his cadre of wicked and perverted minions now holding all the offices of power, it will take Christ Himself to clean this house. But clean it He will.

  12. In 1431 Joan of Arc was excommunicated as a heretic and burned at the stake. About 25 years later, she was rehabilitated and those who excommunicated her were declared full of fraud and malice. In 1920 she was canonized as a saint. So much for excommunications!

  13. As everyone knows, I’m no fan of our current Pope, let alone Cardinal Tucho. However, what Vigano did is objectively schismatic. It’s one thing to criticize a Pope, saying he is doing a bad job, accusing him of misconduct, or even calling for him to step down (which Cardinal Burke, a Canon Lawyer, noted is legitimate if accusations of misconduct are true), but it’s quite another to refuse to recognize a Pope at all, and even refuse to recognize the legitimacy of the Church itself or it’s institutions, as Vigano has done.

    I think Vigano told the truth about McCarrick, but he has tried to stay relevant through infamy by changing from Whistleblower to Conspiracy Pundit, jumping on the Trump bandwagon and his accusations of Election “Fraud”, and becoming an apologist for the Russian Dictator Putin and his invasion of Ukraine. His open association with Richard Williamson, another tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist and open Holocaust denier who was excommunicated for Schism (after being kicked out of the SSPX), also didn’t help his case.

    His biggest mistake, in my opinion, was to refuse to even attend the DDF hearing at all, assume it was rigged, and let them make a ruling without his input. As an attorney, my advise id always to never boycott a hearing you have been summoned to, as you thereby waive your rights in terms of Audi Alteram Partem and guarantee a ruling will be made against you (something Steve Bannon also learned at his expense).

    • Dear JdT, your thoughtful analysis is valued but its core tenet hinges on the very matter in question.

      Many practising Catholics throughout the world (a substantial part of our ‘sensus fidei’) suspect that Jorge Bergoglio – by manipulation of process – was illegitimate from the start and consider Jorge has, over a decade, provided ample evidence for that in his many un-papal, anti-Apostolic & scandalous words, appointments, and decisions.

      Just think what, face-to-face, First Pope Saint Peter would say to Jorge!

      It is commonly argued that Jorge is not a Christian, nor a Catholic, nor a godly man. Catholic legal experts consider that, de jure, he is unable to be a legitimate pope.

      That, de facto, Jorge is known as ‘Pope Francis’ & occupies the wheelhouse of the Barque of Saint Peter is the biggest challenge the Church has faced in recent history.

      It’s not helpful when some, in misplaced loyalty, chant:
      “The pope is the pope, is the pope, is the pope . . .”

      Archbishop Vigano is imperfect but is perfectly right in drawing our attention to the illegitimacy of the election & operation of current Catholic Church administration.

      Many are praying: “Dear Father God, in Jesus’ Name, please give us a proper pope.”

    • This would be more palatable if Francis was as vigilant in prosecuting questions of the validity of Church Doctrine as he is here where the question is of his legitimacy.

      Personally, I have no idea whether the “St. Gallen Mafia” machinations made Francis’ election invalid or if anything he has done subsequently has caused him to be in a state of heresy.

      What I do know is that he is a wrecking ball who has followed his injunction to make a mess.

      If invited to have a Papal audience, I would decline. If the invitation became a summons, I would refuse. There is enough in his public record for me to find him arbitrary, capricious, imperious and petty. I can experience those failings in any number of other settings.

      There is one of his initiatives I will work to advance. “a poorer Church”, I will direct my donations to my local church and charities I deem to be saving souls.

    • The Vatican of Francis has not given ear to the Audi Alteram Partem principle. Not to Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum. Not to Cardinal Zen who claimed Francis’ China policies were schismatizing Catholics in China. Not to Cardinals presenting Dubia re Amoris Laetitia. Not to the African Bishop Conference which would not obey Fiducia Supplicans. Not to the American Bishop Conference which claimed the longstanding Church tradition of denying Eucharist to politicians promoting and enshrining abortion. Et sic porro.

      No reasonable person would expect Francis to listen to Vigano. After all, Francis asked Vigano to appear on the charge of excommunication. Could Francis not have asked for a private audience? Could Francis not have attempted to understand Vigano’s motives prior to issuing an Edict?

      Francis appears to require positions like this: “I will serve you, Holy Father Pope Francis, and I will obey and assist you by honoring and furthering all non-traditional and materially heretical pastoral practices you wish me to honor, uphold, and teach.”

      Francis appoints men after his own heart. Skirts such as Martin, Hollerich, McElroy, McCarrick, Rupnik, and others of their ilk have made perfectly clear a charity of such a heart.

  14. As a long-time computer-chair observer and follower of Pope Francis and the would-be “judges” of this Kangaroo Kourt “justice”: IS Archbishop
    Carlo Maria Viganó a schismatic [ in the sense that HOLY Mother Church
    means “schismatic” ]? What a joke !
    Once again, an 80-year-old cradle Catholic like myself will continue to wait for a Competent Authority to rule on all this Ecclesial Schmozzle.

  15. “Popes are not infallible when making excommunications, or any disciplinary judgment, for they are limited by the information they have on the individual or situation in question.” https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/has-any-pope-been-guilty-of-heresy-1118

    During the 4th century, St. Athanasius found himself in a similar position as Archbishop Vigano. Athanasius was almost the lone voice against the Arian heresy held by majority of bishops. Pope Liberius excommunicated Athanasius who refused to accept the validity of the excommunication as Vigano also has.

    It was Athanasius against the world, and in the end, the excommunicated voice of Athanasius was right.

    Obedience to the pope presupposes pope is obedient to Christ and His Deposit of Faith. When pope contradicts Christ and His Deposit of Faith, then there is an obligation NOT to follow him.

    There is ample evidence of Francis’ departure from the Deposit of Faith like the Arian bishops & Pope Liberius. The following is but a small sample:

    • Telling seminarians to forgive unrepentant sinners even “if we see that there is no intention to repent, we must forgive all” https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2023/01/25/repentance-for-sin-and-sacramental-absolution/

    • Veneration of pagan idols in Vatican (pachamama)

    • Claim that God wills false religions (Abu Dhabi)

  16. If a criminal boasts of his crimes, declares himself proud of them, and boasts of doing many more all in advance of making a formal plea it is ridiculous to complain about a summary judgement. His court appointed defender doubtless did a good job with an insanity defense or he would have been laicized. Since he is in hiding it would have been difficult to try and get an exorcist to check him out.

  17. Who could possibly be concerned about a decree of “excommunication” from Jorge Bergoglio and his henchmen? Or, put another way, who would not be embarrassed and humiliated to be described as being in “full communion” with the pornocrats currently in charge of the Church? It requires a particularly dishonest or gymnastic intellect to believe that anything coming from Rome these days represents the Mind and Will of the Almighty. I am no theologian and no Church historian, and thus I have no idea how all this mess will be explained one day. But I am unwilling to declare that 2 + 2 = 5, or that a starkly naked and malevolent emperor is robed in truth and beauty.

  18. Vigano has said and done things that I won’t defend. It is probably accurate to say that he was asking to be excommunicated and made this latest move inevitable. While he bears guilt for what he has done, Francis and the Vatican shoulder heavily responsibility for this deplorable situation. Vigano has acted rashly and wrongly at times, but he and many others have been pushed to the limit by the unbroken record of scandal and outrage that defines this papacy. Vigano crossed a line that many of us have been pushed to by the hostile and aggressive regime in Rome. There is a little reason to think that he would been radicalized under JPII and Benedict. Indeed, he wasn’t despite the problems associated with the reigns of both men. The egrigous offenses of the Francis papacy have brought us to this point.

    Finally, there is something deeply wrong in a church where heresy, molestation, theft, and Marxist political scheming bring about lesser penalties, if any are imposed at all. Ed Feser has posted on his X account that, according to Aquinas, heresy is worse than schism. Yet, Gregory, Cupich and many others have risen to powerful positions and wield tremendous influence. Vile criminals like Zanchetta and Rupnik remain clerics in good standing. On the other hand, Vigano, who has not tainted himself with personal misconduct or tried to subvert Church teaching, gets a spiritual death sentence.

  19. “No one can exclude themselves from the Church, we are all saved sinners. Our holiness is the fruit of God’s love manifested in Christ, who sanctifies us by loving us in our misery and saving us from it. …”

    “Let’s think about those who have denied the faith, who are apostates, who are the persecutors of the Church, who have denied their baptism: Are these also at home? Yes, these too. All of them. The blasphemers, all of them. We are brothers. This is the communion of saints. The communion of saints holds together the community of believers on earth and in heaven, and on earth: the saints, the sinners, all.” – Pope Francis February 2022 as reported by Catholic News Agency

  20. I think Vigano might have been smarter to remain in his job and not attack the Pope so directly. That being said, I would imagine the Pope has bigger fish to fry if Church Orthodoxy, such as respect for the Pope’s office, is REALLY what he seeks. Public figures who are known world wide for their pro-abortion stance might be the first ones to put in their place. Here I am thinking of Biden, Pelosi, Whoopie Goldberg, and others of their radically pro-abortion ilk. Abortion right up to the day of birth?? Clearly they dont respect him, or the church or anything the church teaches. Given his jolly attitude when meeting them, its hard to think resisting abortion, even late term abortion, is a doctrinal priority for him. If anything, they were challenging the Pope by meeting him face to face on his on ground. Daring him, essentially. Yet he meets them, shakes their hand cordially, even encourages Biden to continue to go to communion. None of it makes sense.

  21. Vigano’s crime was to expose the McCarrick Church, and the Vatican’s complicity with promoting the grave sin of homosexuality (since openly proclaimed by Bergogluo’s “blessings.”
    No one believes that a pope should worship Pachamama, align the Church with the secular global elite, betray the authentic church in China by allowing the CCP to nominate bishops, etc. The Bergoglio “papacy has been unending heresy.

  22. Good riddance. Archbishop Vigano was a Vatican insider who spat the dummy after a catfight with the worst insiders, with whom he had been smilingly rubbing shoulders for years, partaking in their “mistakes” too. His “ministry” for the last seven years has been an internet screen (WHY is he hiding???????), and his missives authored by Pietro Siffi (see Dr. Roberto Mattei for details on that). Vigano has been reconsecrated a bishop by Bishop Williamson, but M. Siffi hasn’t explained why that was necessary. Vigano is a sedevacantist (Pope Francis “defect of intention” etc.), but hasn’t the guts to say do in so many words). Vigano cannot be compared to Archbishop Lefebvre, who never questioned the authority of the Pope (while refusing to follow in certain matters), and had a fruitful ministry. Archbishop Lefebvre did not base his criticism of the Council on calling the Popes who came after it pedophiles.

    Vigano is heretic himself, calling Moscow the Third Rome, and claiming (Letter to Trump, 2020) that the Republicans were the “Sons of Light” mentioned in the Apocalypse. Vigano’s religion of Lockdown/Vaccination is very much old hat. Good riddance. Thank you, and well done, Papa Francisco!!!

    • The Third Rome is a title assumed historically by Moscow following the fall of Constantinople to Islam in A.D. 1453. Not a recent invention. Would like to see a link demonstrating whether, as you allege, Vigano has been consecrated by Bishop Williamson?

      Vigano did not incur excommunication for his years of highlighting alleged poor governance and prudential judgments, omissions, coddling, leveling, ventriloquism, moral ambiguity, and signaling from the Vatican, but INSTEAD for also, finally, and explicitly refusing to respond to the summons and his stated refusal to recognize the (“schismatic”) Prefect for the DDC and even the pope himself, and probably Vatican II.

      A very red line.

      So, a precise distinction that matters; the underlying concerns still exist, and merit real “dialogue” somewhere within the perennial Catholic Church. The opportunity for Appeal within the allowed 60 days could (!) theoretically invite a small “walking together” step in that direction.

      SUMMARY: A plausibly overstressed Archbishop Vigano clearly overreached, but perhaps the Holy Spirit will still surprise all of us.

      Here’s a link to an unofficial English translation of the Vatican Decision: https://wherepeteris.com/english-translation-of-viganos-excommunication-decree/

      • Peter, here are a couple of references to Vigano’s reconsecration by Bishop Williamson in Italian daily newspapers These claims have never been refuted by Bishops Williamson or Vigano.
        https://www.ilgiornale.it/news/politica/vigan-vescovo-ribelle-riconsacrato-lefebvriano-cresce-2267257.html
        https://lanuovabq.it/it/la-crisi-genera-scismi-ora-tocca-a-monsignor-vigano

        Moscow as the “Third Rome” was not widely believed (or known) in Russia before the second half of the nineteenth century, when Russian Conservatives began to copy Western European jingoism to justify imperialism. Monk Filofei of Pskov to the Grande Duke of Moscow (almost a hundred years after the fall of Constantinople) was simply a reminder to the prince to remain religiously faithful because, if Moscow became Islamic, there would be no more “chances”. The letter did NOT make the headlines at the time. “Third Rome” notions were NOT used as a justification for the Russian state during its expansion in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries. It’s a nineteenth-century myth. (Marshall T. Poe, Moscow, Third Rome, National Council for Soviet and East European Research, Harvard University 1997).

        Catholics know there has always been but one Rome.The flow of occultist, gnostic nonsense coming out of Moscow into the ears of Western conservatives is proof of this. The errors of Russia have arrived.

          • Elias. A good place to start would be Alexander Dugin’s ideas. He’s a great ideological ally of Steve Bannon. Many conservatives in the West are imbibing this sort of thing from various types of Russian Conservatism (itself, only a virulent form of this Western Enlightenment ideology) Dugin’s site is called geopolitika.ru
            It’s a repository of all the ideological errors of the modern West, with occultism thrown in (in some cases quite diabolical), yet all dressed up in “Traditionalist” vocabulary. Careful if you read this and are a conservative – conservatives have very few defences left against such stuff. That why the errors of Russia are more dangerous than the woke nutjobs who all stand out a mile off.

        • What does any of this have to do with Russia??
          I guess I’m a bit slow but I’m not connecting the dots.
          We should be praying for everyone involved here I think. And for unity in the Body of Christ. Satan divides and breaks things apart. That’s not what we want to see.

        • Thank your for the links.
          and, yes, “Moscow as the ‘Third Rome’ was not widely believed (or known) in Russia before the second half of the nineteenth century.”
          And yet an oblique assertion of this stature (not yet the title) appears as early as A.D. 1492 and again as you report in the early 16th Century–still apart from any later Russian-state expansionism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow,_third_Rome

          • Peter, I think the early letters had no impact and did not express the “Third Rome” ideology invented in the late nineteenth century. It’s a case of reading history backwards. Make as much sense as the multicultural Robin Hood films we see from the UK these days. Russian expansionism did not take place as any sort of revived Roman Enpire. For Archbishop Vigano and others to cite this as a cause of hope for the West (Catholics did particularly badly under Moscow, and seven million will get it in the neck if Ukraine loses).

  23. An honest and sincere question: Are we who agree with Archbishop Vegano’s declarations in his letter “J’Accuse” also considered excommunicated “Latae Sententiae” by virtue of the transitive property of logic?

    It seems to me that it does, given the definition of latae sententiae –

    “A latae sententiae penalty is a penalty that is inflicted ipso facto, automatically, by force of the law itself, at the very moment a law is contravened, hence a broadly applied judgment. A ferendae sententiae penalty is a penalty that is inflicted on a guilty party only after a case has been brought and decided by an authority in the Church.”

    Lastly, it seems to me that the DDF (or is it DDT) erred in issuing a judgement against Archbishop Vigano “latae sententiae” rather than “ferendae sententiae”.

    • We read: “…agree with Archbishop Vigano’s declarations…” Which “declarations”?
      The accusations over grievances of the past eleven years are one thing…And quite another–and for which the penalty specifically applies–are the two added and very public and pertinacious assertions that Vatican II was not a Council and that the pope is not a pope…

      In these cases, to formally and directly promote schism would be one thing, while to indirectly enable or not prevent an immoral culture seems to be cleverly or incompetently quite another. Hypothetically, is the smoke of Satan more inhaled than clearly defined—and therefore canonically below the radar? The diffuse Gradualism of ecclesial climate change!

      SUMMARY: For canon lawyers, something like trying to pinpoint and kill a marine sponge with a needle.

  24. Vigano (and also the few remaining orthodox bishops) would have done better to simply issue frequent public letters addressed to: “Your Holiness, the Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Catholic Church, Successor of Peter” and then proceed to admonish the Pope for each of the many occasions when he failed as Shepherd of the Universal Church. It would have served to recognize his authority in the Church and then point out his failures (which again are many).

    • Unfortunately, Vigano is not orthodox. Calling the opposition to the US Democrats in 2020 “the Sons of Light” is blasphemous. The Sons of Light are the Catholics in the last days. On no account does this include that pro-abortionist, pro-same-sex marriage, Hispanic-Catholic hater, WASP Donald Trump and co.

      Granted,there are terrible clerics in our Church, and this Pope is liberal, LIKE HIS FOUR PREDECESSORS, but the Church has seen it all before. Vigano adopts Luther’s Rome=Babylon/AntiChrist narrative that ALWAYS, ALWAYS leaves one outside the Body of Christ.

      Pope Francisco, I don’t agree with you on so many things, but you have providentially shown up the blot on the Church landscape that is U.S. conservative Catholicism, which is going down because IT HAS HOPELESSLY COMPROMISED ITSELF WITH ANGLO-CONSERVATIVE IDEOLOGY.

      Traditional Catholics can see modernists and liberals coming a mile off. The conservatives who have tried to graft their ideology onto the Church have been harder to spot. But it’s all coming out in the wash in this gran lio. Thanks again Papa Francisco. Bien hecho!

      • Miguel, I give you credit for trying but your popesplaining doesn’t carry any water. Unfortunately, it seems to me that you have a terminal case of TDS.

      • Dear ‘mc’ – your comments are unique in their heights of emotion, gung-ho loyalty, & paucity of connection with the facts already put before us in this and other CWR scholarly articles & in many comments by faithful & learned Catholics.

        If you despise US Catholics because they are in your words compromised by Anglo conservative ideology (whatever that is!), why post your comments in a US Catholic journal that is respected and valued by US Catholics and around the globe?

        It’s all very mysterious. As things stand you appear to have been purchased by the PF media machine to bad-mouth all the pro-Apostolic work being done in CWR & throughout the Catholic world.

        As with all in the PF machine, the opportunity to repent & side with the truth is before you, whilst there is yet life.

        Ever in the grace & mercy of King Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty

      • Wow, Miguel! Aren’t you supposed to, like, not be judgey?

        If I didn’t know you were a morally enlightened, highly virtuous and always compassionate progressive Catholique, I’d suspect you were a rigid and subversive Trump adorer.

        • Martin, some US Catholics are being made victims by the conservative ideologies preying upon them. To point this out is not to despise the victim. Are you upset that somebody says Conservatism has no clothes. Time to discard Enlightenment ideologies (all of them) and get with the faith. I seem to have posted just where these comments will be most valued.

          • Dear ‘mc’, your knee-jerk accusation of ‘conservatism’ is baseless.

            As a scientist I spent many years educating poor people in Africa and have had the joy of supervising the PhD research of two African students (now Professor Samuel Waladde & Professor Peter Njagi) both of whom have played a major role in educating the poor and in overcoming serious diseases in Africa.

            As a Catholic Christian evangelist & healer I have ministered to people of every sort of race, gender, age, and social position. My own scientific research has contributed to our urgent need for ecological sustainability. By GOD’s grace, I’ve always stood (sometimes at considerable personal cost) for the needs of the suffering & misused peoples of our world.

            My 1st PhD was on the nervous system of the tsetse fly, a very serious pest. My 2nd PhD was on Ethical Encounter Theology, attempting to show that a ‘creatio ex ethica’ worldview is capable of reconciling science and Christianity – without any need to diminish The New Testament.

            Is it not a mindless, serious insult for you to berate me as a conservative? Maybe, reflect, does this blunder not show you how shallow the general tenor of your comments can be?

            I have always stood for truth before anything else – please recall, dear ‘mc’, that our Master said: “All those of the truth listen to Me”.

            My very strong complaint about PF and those he has gathered around him is that they have no respect for The New Testament, for Truth, nor for the well-tested Traditions of our glorious Catholic faith.

            In supporting them you are aligning yourself with hard-left, knee-jerk, pseudo-Catholic, unitarian, universalist, libertarians who fondly consider their half-baked ideas are an improvement on The Holy Spirit-anointed Apostolic witness of The New Testament. Followers of Pontius Pilate they scorn God’s revelation: “What is truth?” is their mocking theme song.
            Narcissistically they claim: “Truth is what WE say it is!”

            Archbishop Vigano is not perfect but he is perfectly correct in strongly objecting to what he discerns as an unpapal administration.

            While there is life there is still hope.
            Repentance is always an option for them, for you, and for all of us.

            Always seeking to hear & lovingly obey King Jesus Christ; blessings from marty

      • Dear ‘mc’, so much fun observing you repeatedly tilting at windmills.

        May King Jesus Christ direct you towards more worthy targets, such as the anti-Apostolic & pornocratic corrupters of the Church.

        Ever in the love of the Lamb; blessings from Marty

        • Martin, you are clearly a person of excellence and achievement. You ought to try to focus on the issues being discussed, comments on the points made in other comments etc., if you want to contribute to the debate. If you are astonished as the blasphemy of questioning conservatism, you ought to find out what it really is. There is no Church of divine law against questioning this ideology.

          • Dear ‘mc’, please find someone educated who can advise you about logic in composition. As it stands, this, your latest comment is especially incoherent – it makes no sense at all.
            And, dear ‘mc’, you still owe me a sincere apology.
            Ever in the love of King Jesus Christ; blessings from marty

  25. Those here who stand with Vigano, who despise and disrespect Pope Francis, who resist and reject Vatican II reforms – especially the liturgy, and those who persist in refusing to give “obedience of faith” and “religious assent” to the supreme and ordinary Magisterium (Catechism of the Catholic Church 891 & 892), can now freely crossover to the Church of Viganism, began with the seminary Vigano launched, priests he illicitly ordained, and now that he proudly admitted he’s a schismatic sedevacantist (“It’s an honor”), he can now unchallengingly proclaim himself the Pope of.

      • DD attacks Vigano – yet none of us consider Vigano to be an alternative to The Church. Vigano’s authenticity is not the issue of importance to faithful Catholics.

        DD is not honest in failing to address the ghastly damage to the Church being caused by PF & Co., that has been highlighted by Vigano and by so many other learned & informed Catholics around the world.

        DD needs to refrain from nuking fleas, whilst swallowing camels.

        Always seeking to follow The Lamb; love & blessings from marty

      • It would be a better question brineyman to ask who are you to judge? We hear a constant barrage of venom by self proclaimed followers of Viagano’s schism. Were they Catholics as they claim or from the plethora of anticatholic enemies assailing the Church worldwide. If the bearer of the keys of the kingdom of Christ is never to be trusted then it is a perfectly fair question to have doubts about his detractors. For all we know you could be a mason, jihadist, Marxist, Hindu nationalist,seventh day Adventist, animist, atheist,satanist,fascist,KKK, drug lord, or a GRU cyber troll. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

    • Vatican II includes careful reforms of the Liturgy (read the actual document), but was not about reforms. Instead:

      “What above all concerns the Ecumenical Council is this: that the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine be safeguarded and taught more effectively (…) Therefore, the principle purpose of this Council is not the discussion of this or that doctrinal theme . . . a Council is not required for that . . .(but) this certain and immutable doctrine, which is to be faithfully respected, needs to be explored and presented in a way which responds to the needs of our time” (Pope John XXIII, 1962).

      “We can say things differently, but we can’t say different things” (St. Augustine). And, the rest is history…

      • Couldn’t be expressed better than this, dear PDB:
        “We can say things differently, but we can’t say different things” (St. Augustine).

        Godly Catholic domestics might bravely conspire to instal those saving words over the bedheads of PF & CF.

  26. Excommunication, the equal of a fatwa, and equally petulant.
    Benedict XVI did not excommunicate Hans Küng, a priest whose views were far more «eccentric».

  27. Matt 23:2-3 “The scribes and Pharisees have their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example.”
    Let’s do what Jesus tells us!

    • This kind of thinking you have is Protestantish Uncatholic. Bypass or disregard the Pope and just directly do what Christ said and did. Christ founded his Church with Peter as its earthly leader.

      • Add: Saint Peter, 1st Pope, told us exactly what we need to believe and do, together with his 8 co-authors, in their Holy Spirit-inspired New Testament, that PF & Co, so despise & pervert.

        Is it not hypocritical to appeal to Saint Peter & then mock his teachings!

  28. This argument will be never-ending until someone more schooled and lettered than myself has addressed Archbishop Vigano’s latest letter, entitled “J’Accuse”, in which lists and backs up, point by point, each element of and for which he was excommunicated.
    The category of excommunication of “Latae Sententiae” is automatic (ipso facto) for anyone who violates Church Law, such as Bilious Biden’s frequent reception of Holy Communion whilst, at the same time, issuing Executive Orders that the U.S. Government directly assist, encourage and finance abortion with tax dollars. JB is, by his actions, is automatically excommunicated Latae Sententiae. Just ask him if he cares…that’s another issue.

    The DDF held a hearing to decide whether or not a person has violated Church law to the point that lawful and proper Church authorities are compelled to arrive at a judgement of excommunication. The DDF stated that ArchBishop Vigano was guilty of the first point in the list of LS offenses: “Being an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic.”

    I, for one, would like to see a detailed and specific itemization of charges against AV by the DDF.
    I’m willing to bet that with a good Canon Lawyer at his side, Archbishop Vigano would have come out of such a fair and honest trial fully intact.
    However, it is obvious that the DDF had made up its collective mind ,or it was made for them, long before the summons of Archbishop Vigano to appear before them. That is why he didn’t bother to appear – The writing was on the latrine wall deep in the labyrinthine bowels of the Vatican.

    • Such discerning analyses are one of the main reasons so many good Catholics are reading CWR.

      We are getting far more of ‘The Truth that’s sets you free’ in the columns of CWR than from the sugar-coated cyanide distributed by PF’s pornocrat anti-Apostles.

  29. Under the current pontificate did not the Vatican issue a commémorative stamp for the schismatics who fronted the Protestant revolt?
    Make a mess, be illogical, have fun.
    The times politically, culturally, spiritually are out of joint.
    Maybe we need to read these things as signs and portents of something awesome.

  30. While it’s true God can write straight with crooked lines, what has to happen first at least is He lets the crooked lines run and show themselves; and then second, if He warrants, He leaves them going to reveal how far they will reach going crooked and how how much lateral room they will use for stretching out their crookedness getting there. One of the reasons God writes straight with crooked lines when He chooses to do it, is so that poor critters like me won’t have to say, I told you so. Same thing when God never straightens out the crooked lines for them, Who is free to do this as well. Sounds funny and it’s ultra grave.

  31. Those who agree with many or some of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s criticisms of the PF regime should not be depicted as having accepted everything he stands for; by no means.

    Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has highlighted some of the seriously un-Catholic statements and decisions made by Pope Francis and his chosen administrators.
    Millions of good, practicing Catholic people are deeply concerned because the current administration in Rome is setting the Church on a road that is alien to both New Testament Christianity and hallowed Catholic tradition.
    This alienation reverberates throughout the Church globally, with some strange effects at the local level.

    For example: the Archdiocese of Brisbane, in Australia, has issued a ‘Synod24 Prayer’, addressed to the ‘bold creativity’ of a ‘Creator Spirit’ and repeatedly invoking ‘the Risen Christ’.

    This prayer is an exhortation to Catholics to accept ‘those who are hurt, excluded & on the margins’. Presumably those in various forms of unrepented, serious sexual sin.
    It certainly makes no reference to the handicapped, impoverished, bullied, sexually abused, and excluded victims of clergy child molestation and vulnerable adult sexual abuse.
    All the churches in our Brisbane Archdiocese are expected to pray the archbishop’s ‘Synod24 Prayer’ after every Sunday Holy Mass.

    There is no mention of GOD, or of The HOLY TRINITY, nor of The LORD Jesus Christ.
    No reference at all to the bedrock of Apostolic teaching we have inherited and that our Archbishop once committed himself to serve in undivided loyalty.

    Everyone knows that all sorts of diverse religions believe in creator spirits and in risen anointed beings; religions & cults that frequently embrace unrepented sin.
    Is that now to be us?

    Surely, Catholic Christianity is unique in submitting all our prayers to the Crucified, Resurrected, Ascended, Reigning, & Soon Returning JESUS CHRIST of Nazareth; our Only KING!
    Every Holy Mass, each of us totally commit to King Jesus Christ in Gloria, Creed, and Holy Communion. How has our KING been so easily discarded in this synodal prayer?
    Is it because the-powers-that-be – either unwittingly or deliberately – do not want our King to judge the bad eggs they’re planning to hatch in the synods?

    Repeatedly invoking ‘the Risen Christ’ seems to echo Pope Francis’ claim that before his novelties we’ve merely been invoking the entombed Christ.
    Utter, pagan nonsense! How many other diocese have been infected by this plague . . ?

    Beloved Apostle John makes our Catholic faith perfectly plain (John 16:14 & 15) –
    “He (The Holy Spirit of Truth) will glorify Me (Jesus Christ) since all He tells you will be taken from what is Mine.”
    “Everything The Father has is Mine; that is why I said: ‘All He tells you will be taken from what is Mine.'”

    That is CHRIST IN GLORY, the Trinitarian Christ, who all true Catholics have always invoked and still continue to invoke today, all around the world.
    Any synodal decisions at odds with our KING are likely to bring judgement on their perpetrators. Brisbane Archdiocese please take note!

    Ever seeking to hear & lovingly obey King Jesus Christ; blessings from marty

  32. Poor Dr. James Martin Rice. Dost thou strainest at gnats? Maybe not…

    We read: “the Archdiocese of Brisbane, in Australia, has issued a ‘Synod24 Prayer’, addressed to the ‘bold creativity’ of a ‘Creator Spirit’ and repeatedly invoking ‘the Risen Christ’ [AND] Everyone knows that all sorts of diverse religions believe in creator spirits…”

    Three Comments and a Summary:

    FIRST, Balthasar gives us this about a Creator God:
    “The responses of the Old Testament and a fortiori of Islam (which remains essentially in the enclosure of the religion of Israel) are incapable of giving a satisfactory answer to the question of why Yahweh, why Allah, created a world of which he did not have need in order to be God. Only the fact is affirmed in the two religions, not the why.
    “The Christian response is contained in these two fundamental dogmas: that of the Trinity and that of the Incarnation” (“My Life in Retrospect,” 1993).

    SECOND, Islamic dialogue:
    “O People of the Scripture! Come to a common word as between us and you [title to a dialogue document in 2007], [AND] that we worship none but God and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, that we erect not, from among ourselves, lords and patrons other than Allah.” (Q 3:64).

    THIRD, from the late 1970s, why are we reminded of a militant nun quoted in the Seattle media as advocating female ordinations? To her the endgame was not this, but ultimately to eliminate the priesthood altogether. Just as civil unions became the stalking horse/Trojan Horse for “gay marriage.” Now blessed…

    SUMMARY: What, then, the long-term future of an invertebrate (c)hurch with no remaining hint of “clericalism,” nor of being “sent” (apostello)?

    Brisane’s Fatherless “Creator Spirit” in both turban and red hat and speaking Esperanto?

    • Thankyou, dear Peter D Beaulieu for your enlightening perspectives.

      One had in mind the ‘Colossian heresy’ that Saint Paul refuted as altogether inadequate; simply a deceptive & hollow philosophy, incapable of raising us above our sin nature.

      The solution the Apostle instructs is: “. . never say or do anything except in The Name of The LORD JESUS, giving thanks to GOD The Father through Him.” [Colossians 3:17]
      Nothing in true Catholicism (or any sincere Christianity) should ever be separated from JESUS CHRIST, The Name Above All Names! [Philippians 2:9-10]

      In Brisbane, freemasonry is legion, including among Catholic hierarchs & lay, as well as in many Protestant churches that I have researched.
      For this reason, Jesus Christ’s absolute authority over Heaven & Earth [Matthew 28:18b] is hardly believed & never proclaimed.

      Thus, in Brisbane, any references to ‘risen christ’ always carry some worrying, alternative connotations of e.g. Knights of the Sun, Knights of the Phoenix, etc.
      Also, as ‘Square Magazine’ informs:
      “The tale of Hiram Abiff is central to the Masonic initiation rituals, where candidates symbolically reenact his death and resurrection in a ceremony known as the Master Mason’s degree. This ritual represents the transformation of the candidate into a Master Mason, who has attained the highest level of moral and spiritual enlightenment.” No one seems to care that Rome has abjured freemasonry . . !

      Also, as pointed out previously, references to ‘creator spirits’ owes more to New Age heresies than to The New Testament.
      In truth, The Holy Spirit of God is given as our advocate, helper, counsellor, and comforter; completely at the service of King Jesus Christ, by whom, and through whom, and for whom all things are created. [Colossians 1:15-20]
      Only pagans refer to The Holy Spirit as a creator spirit separate from the authority of Jesus Christ.

      Thus, dear Peter, Moslem fezzes and Esperanto are the very least of the concerns of true Catholic followers of King Jesus Christ.
      The comprehensive situation for Brisbane Catholics is drastically more deadly.

      At the minimum: we could at least request that all liturgical prayers are made in The Name Above Every Other Name, that is of King Jesus Christ, our LORD & only Teacher.

      Ever seeking to follow The Lamb of God; love & blessings from marty

  33. Vigano has sunken far lower than even schism, he is a nihilist who wants the utter destruction of anything about the post Pius X church and rejection all its popes. He has demonstrated this by his going to a sedevacantist “traditional” separatist bishop to be “reordained”. Which indicates rejection of all ordinations and the sacriments priests and bishops are necessary to make. Vigano for pope? Sure he would like that but all the rest of the rogue bishops want the same honors including the “Old Catholics” and “Polish National Catholics” from Vatican I days. They are not in union with each other not just Rome.

    • Dear JJR, I agree with you that the ecclesial frolics of those you mention are very disappointing.

      But, PLEASE let us leave the minors for another day. We (the grassroots Catholic Church) are faced by a mega problem: a leader who neither in his process of election, nor in his evident bad faith towards the oath of office, nor by his manifest anti-Apostolic & pornocratic rule, nor in his gross administrative bungles, merits the title of Pope of the Catholic Church

      If our current leader had been a true pope, it seems unlikely that Vigano & many others would have had sufficient legitimate grounds to jump ship. Because PF is a playactor, surrounding himself with other would-be thespians, devoid of any real love for ordinary Catholics (think China), wickedly disrespectful of The New Testament, & self-confessedly quite unable to show us how to follow King Jesus Christ, our LORD. that we are likely to see many defections, like that of AV.

      Let’s keep praying & lovingly following The Lamb; blessings from marty

      • We read: “If our current leader had been a true pope, it seems unlikely that Vigano & many others would have had sufficient legitimate grounds to jump ship.”

        “Reason to jump ship”? Yours truly proposes reasons NOT to jump ship…

        FIRST, Cantalamessa (preacher of the papal household since 1981) authored a delightful little book entitled “The Mystery of Pentecost” (2001). Part unpacks the sometimes-problematic fit between conceptual dogmas and the ongoing life of the Spirit (neither displacing the other):
        “[John’s Gospel] illuminates the Holy Spirit’s role in BECOMING [italics]–that is, in the very establishment and birth of the Church—whereas [it also, Jn. 14-16] illuminates the role of the Holy Spirit in its BEING [italics]—that is, in the enduring of functioning of the Church, in other words, in its growth and life [….]”

        SECOND, about the “growth and life,” Balthasar explains somewhere that growth and life is not limited to ever-more explicit formulations of what is only implicit in Scripture…
        But, rather, is also open to new movements of the same Spirit—to what is refreshingly and almost totally new. He points to the two recent Marian dogmas. BUT, he also reaffirms that what is quite new cannot ever contradict what has been faithfully held within the living tradition of the indwelling Holy Spirit. In another consistent writing—now explicitly part of the Magisterium!— St. John Paul II reaffirms the natural law and moral absolutes (Veritatis Splendor, n. 115).

        THIRD, unlike the so-called conservatives, incremental innovators are often so open to theological mutation that even the universal and non-demonstrable principle of non-contradiction is eclipsed. While binary and complementary human sexuality is not explicitly denied, it now shares airtime with the oblique blessing of “irregular couples—as “couples,” postured as outreach to the embedded lifestyle.

        Content is displaced by signaling and proceduralism—and to never quite deciding or undeciding. Maybe provisional decisions, but nothing at the level of moral judgments.

        The calculated fine line is to never actually commit formal schism, or apostasy, or heresy. But, instead, to enable stuff within a parallel universe of dialogue, harmonization of opposites, and a gradualist convergence toward the Teilhardian “noosphere”?

        SUMMARY: This is not the “time” to jump ship. Time is NOT greater than space. In another parallel, secular, and separate (?) universe, the living dogma is: “illegitimi non carborundum.”

        • Thanks, dear Peter D Beaulieu, for such a learned exposition (& your earlier one).

          The reason why true Catholics have always founded themselves on the Apostolic revelation & clear teaching of The New Testament (as demonstrated by the over 3,500 New Testament citations in our Catechism of the Catholic Church) is that every basic in our faith, including our understanding of The Holy Eucharist, is given to us by the Holy Spirit-anointed Apostolic witness in The New Testament.

          Regarding “jumping ship” – it’s surely never an option for true Catholics. But you’d agree I think that not every Catholic is strong enough to handle clergy ignorance of Christ & hence paucity of faith, sexual abuses & molestations, lying cover-ups, gross misapplication of Church funds, and cruel neglect of the victims of clergy misfeasances.

          In addition, many godly Catholics are scandalised when they discover the extent of the ‘double-mindedness’ of many Catholic clerical & lay leaders having allegiances to banned freemasonry & other occult groups (including what is euphemistically referred to as ‘women’s religion’.)

          Even in such dire situations, godly clergy & lay often hang-on but the breaking point comes when the incumbent of the Seat of Peter proves to be anything but Petrine.
          The current pontificate does nothing consistently to correct the widespread abuses in our Church but consistently adds to them.
          Godly commentators on this CWR article have already listed these unprecedented failures, so there’s no need to reiterate them.

          Ever in the grace & mercy of Jesus Christ; love & blessings from marty

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.


*