@HomealonerHill he was born in 1941 so most likely originally ordained after 1969....when new rites went into effect...unless a traditional bishop somehow ordained him..the rumor I heard he may have recently been conditionally ordained...not sure.
For Archbishop Vigano to speak his truth, notwithstanding extreme penalties, demonstrates his heartfelt integrity. He refuses to be threatened. That is powerful.
May GOD Almighty Father Richly Bless And Protect You Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano In Yeshua Jesus Christ's Precious Saviour's Name Shalom And Amen!✝️✝️🛐🛐😇🌟🤗🙏🙏🙏🇨🇦🇮🇱♾️🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🗽🦅❤❤❤‼️
At the 6:45 mark they talk about the SSPX coming out with a letter distancing themselves from Vigano. I have done a Google search going over 7 pages and find many news sights saying the same, but I have not found the SSPX letter saying it. The SSPX has nothing on the subject. What is the source for this news that the SSPX has come out with a letter distancing themselves from Vigano?
Ha ha ha😂 love that comment bishop Sanborn the only thing You want to discuss with the modernists in the vatican is when they're packing their bags!! 😂 love it.
One real highlight for me in this video (other than the extraordinary news) is His Excellency's amazing humility in saying "I was impatient." Speaks to a noble heart, me thinks.
Denying the truth is the sad part. Sometimes the intricacies of one's thinking can hinder one from seeing the truth when in fact it is stated in plain and simple language. Pax
It would be interesting if the groundswell for Sedevacantism as a result of Abo. Vigano’s “excommunication” were to take hold in the conservative new “Mass” goers instead of the SSPX resistance camp.
@@EdwardBray-i1w Bishop Sanborn merely teaches the same Catholic doctrines which were taught up until the Modernist heretics took over the Vatican. And the Modernists’ Novus Ordo Mass is a protestantised Mass which was actually designed with input from Protestant ministers.
@@EdwardBray-i1wBishop Sanborn is just as much of a bishop (if not more) than Vigano, by literal definition. You don't have to like or agree with Sanborn, but have some respect for the title.
Where was the Holy Spirit during Vatican II ? Had he already abandoned the Church? I thought the Church has been guided by the Holy Spirit. Now, with all these issues about Vatican II, and the Pope not being the pope, should we continue to accept the Church's teachings as true? How do we know which decisions were guided by the Holy Spirit and which were not?
The Church has never defined who or what is holding back the Antichrist in 2 Thessalonians 2:7. One opinion is that it is the pope. If this is true, then by God's decree, this mysterious Antichrist can only appear when there is no pope to restrain him.
We as faithful to our Catholic Faith, needed the chastisement of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church for the salvation of souls. The errors, heresies, and lies of the apostate leaders in Vatican especially the heretic Bergoglio misled many ignorant people to eternal damnation of souls. We have observed the deafening silence of many Cardinals and Bishops who are indifferent, just blindly obey and blindly follow without thinking their apostate antipope Bergoglio of his errors, heresies, and lies. "The blind guides the blind will both fall into the ditch." You are guilty of the "Sin of Ommission."
In my understanding, Viganò said that Bergoglio is no pope but didn’t say anything about the previous cv2 “popes”. Is it possible a “collaboration”/“dialogue”/etc between our position (cassiciacum) and his? How? Thank you
As far as I can tell, no-he needs to condemn the previous Vatican to “popes” as well in order to be consistent. Lack of consistency is a sure sign of error.
Thank you, very clear. This watershed moment with AB Vigano may be the "real" recognize & resist time for the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. 🙏
Now I have a doubt, if popes after Vatican 2 council are not true popes or their election null and void, then all the bishops, archbishops and cardinals are also null and and void as they are elected by pope including archbishop vigano. Then how can he himself archbishop. Clarify.
No problem! So long as it wasn’t by Bp. Huonder, no problem. The other bishops were consecrated by Archbishop LeFebvre, unless you hold his meaningless excommunication to be true. Even if you did, your confirmation is valid but not licit according to the n.o.
If you were “confirmed” by Vitus Huonder, or even by an SSPX bishop using oils “consecrated” by Vitus Huonder (happened these past 2 years), there is a positive doubt. Otherwise, no worries.
The Occupier of the highest chair on Earth has participated in numerous gatherings "outside" the church, including those at Saint Gallen, Switzerland, where now infamous group of high level of hierarchy ; they met to plan and execute those plans to take over the church from inside out!!!
I fully agree. Not only that, early on Bergolio said "don't call me that," with regard to being Christ's man on earth. He added, 'my name is Bergolio.' Do the research.
Catholic Family Podcast often has sedevacantist clerics on for interviews (such as Bp. Charles McGuire, CMRI priests, etc). There also the sermons uploaded by @traditionalcatholicsermons8507.
Unfortunately, Archbishop Viganò holds many other opinions and positions, which are not theological at all, but which not will be helpful for the credibillity of the sediprivationist thesis, I think.
There already was times of confusion, Assisi abomination etc., and there was archbishop Thuc, but he wasn't change situation in Vatican. So, why "archbishop" Vigano could change something?
I agree this is major. But, sadly, I doubt much will come of it. The hope is it will "mainstream" the sedevancantists/privationist reality, but I just don't think many people or clerics will jump on board his train. I hope I'm wrong. Wouldn't be the first time...
I think you are right. R&R people are too cowardly to profess the full catholic faith. They want to be recognized and be in communion with heretics, and yet they refuse communion with us.
The Church, founded by Our Lord Himself, is incapable of teaching error or leading souls astray. But the Modernists who have usurped the positions of (apparent) authority in the Church are doing just that. So what’s there to “come back home” to, especially in view of Our Lord’s warning in Mt. 24:15-16? And Repent of what, exactly?
What do you mean by "the true church"? The 'church' that teaches religious liberty, ecumenism and collegiality? The 'church' that gives communion to adulterers and blesses sodomites? The 'church' that does not require faith for salvation? The 'church' that persecutes Vigano and promotes Fr. Martin?
@@mhtseminary The Church founded by Jesus Christ and handed to Peter. The same church that gave you the faith you’ve broken away from. The same Church that POPE Francis leads today. As flawed as the church may be, the gates of hell will not prevail against it.
Francis is a pervert and traitor: needs be expelled to a distant monastery to do penance for the sin of misleading the flock during his fraudulent papacy. Not a good shepherd entrusted with protecting the flock from wolves.
If you are Christian, real one, you must be follow by love of Christ. Then because this love, found by yourselves. You will discover. If not, you judge yourself
The truth about the Church is slowly regaining its rightful right to be present. As bishop Sanborn noted, it seems that bishop Vigano's statement in the future will prove to be a significant development in this process.
That is what I finally decided if Pope is with Christ I am either Christ but Pope Francis is not with Christ as any lay Catholic can see than I can not be with Pope Francis
The Pope cannot be an unshakable rock if it is possible that he will teach error or that people will doubt the validity of his appointment. We must choose between obeying Pope Francis or believing the Promise made to Peter to be false. The problem we face extends beyond Catholicism. It is, in general, that of FAITH. What we believe, we believe because of its plausibility, that is to say, its conformity with opinions that we hold to be true. This means that if these prior convictions no longer seem as certain to us, or if the object of our faith no longer presents the characteristics which made it seem worthy of faith, our fidelity has lost its rational basis. We thought we had chosen a good path, but along the way we no longer know whether we should go forward or turn back.
The Pope cannot teach error. We sedevacantists base our position on the infallibility and indefectibility of the Church. Which is what leads to the necessary conclusion that Jorge Bergoglio, while validly elected, does not possess the form of the papacy-the authority from God to teach, rule, and sanctify-on account of the obstacle he has placed in the way of his reception of that authority. This obstacle is the man’s objective intention to impose a false, non-Catholic religion (Vatican II/the Novus Ordo) on the Church; again, a Pope cannot teach error. The same goes for Bergoglio’s Vatican II predecessors (John XXIII to BXVI). Therefore, he is not a true pope.
@@tommastroianni641 Without a Pope, there is no unshakable rock either. That was the point of my first sentence. False Pope = no Pope = no unshakable rock = no infallibility for the CHURCH. Bad foundations = no foundations => the entire building can collapse => it was NOT different from non divine buildings => christianity is a false religion. IF now we start reasoning with the assertion that it MUST be true, the logical conclusion is that Pope Francis must be right in whatever he teaches…
@@jonathanb.6926 - you have it backwards: it is *because* he is the Pope he is therefore protected by the Holy Ghost from teaching error. That we’re currently deprived of a reigning Pope (i.e., the visible head of the Church) has no bearing on the infallibility of the Church. There were three years of interregnum following the death of Clement IV in 1268. Did the Church cease to be infallible during that time? Or what about the periods of interregnum following the deaths of every other Pope? What we’re dealing with now is unprecedented in the history of the Church: men who possess valid elections to the Papacy but who have not received the authority from God to rule owing to their objective intention to impose a false religion, thus rendering them false popes despite all appearances to the contrary. This is now the longest interregnum in history and God is permitting it, of course, for a greater good. To instead say that God has given authority to a true Pope who, in turn, uses that authority to lead souls astray through false teachings and disciplines-as the Vatican II anti-popes have done-is infinitely worse than a 65-plus year interregnum (and counting).
@@tommastroianni641 If the guardian of the unity of the Church fails, either because he teaches errors or because his position remains vacant, the Church is no longer protected against disintegration. It is no longer infallible. The proof that the Church is no longer infallible during the vacancy of the apostolic see is that, during this period, the Church does not perform any act which requires the grace of infallibility. Besides, if the Church could be infallible without having a pope at its head, why would we care about having one? The difference between the crises of the past and the apostasy of Rome since V2 is that it is not the papacy alone that has turned its back on the traditional faith of the Catholic Church, but almost the entire high clergy - and this, of his own free will. I wonder where the infallibility of the ecclesiastical magisterium would have taken refuge if it was attached neither to the apostolic see nor to the communion of bishops of the whole world... There is one fact which proves that the Church is not infallible and never has been: it has used its supposedly infallible authority to teach things contrary to its traditional teaching. It was not a false pope, then another false pope and a series of false popes who did this; it is, with all these so-called vicars of Jesus Christ, the overwhelming majority of depositaries of apostolic authority = thousands of bishops. Were they, too, false bishops? I know the sedevacantist solution very well. It interested me at first. But ultimately I find it too far-fetched. I see another much more likely and coherent; this solution is that the Church had never been protected from any of the evils from which other societies can suffer. If the Church had remained faithful to certain beliefs for a long time, this was not due to a supernatural privilege, but to the same destiny which causes ancient constructions to remain standing for centuries before finally collapsing. The moral duty, for those who thought they needed it to find God, is to understand why they thought that. The end of their dismay is not to be able to breathe new life into a past which is now dead. It is rather to examine more closely the first foundation of Christianity, namely the mediation of Jesus Christ in the work of our salvation. The Church was originally built to spread the "good news" of an imminent salvation that never happened... It is for this purely virtual salvation that Jesus is considered a savior. Is it really serious to rest our eternal destiny on something so inconsistent?
If he really believes Francis is not pope it just shows how delusional he is. He should join the Q Anon brigade who believe Trump is still president & JFK is secretly his VP. Vigano probably believes that as well
No - there cannot be two vicars of Christ. Tying anyone to political nonsense and ideology is ridiculous. It is immaturely smearing your opponent. This goes back to the 60s when TLM was eliminated and the Church fell apart and vocations plummeted as well as Catholic Education which is evangelization commanded by Christ. Vigano is correct. V2 was in error. Benedict's death does not make Francis valid because Benedict was banished for globalists, and open borders to monetize Catholic Charities and infiltrate the US for political purposes and help with wiping out Western European culture as well as the US. One must ask how many cardinal's votes were bought to "install" Francis.
@@laabt7610 - Ever hear that there can be only one Vicar of Christ? Did Christ choose two St. Peter figures? No, it is not the royal heir-and-a-spare lineup. A lot of people agree with Vigano, for exactly that reason, and the number is not small. Bishops are political people. They know there will be retribution if they speak out. They just want to keep the peace. Upstarts lose their credentials and are often banished to far flung parts for the earth as punishment.
Luke 5:20 JKV "And when HE (CHRIST) saw their faith, HE said unto him, Man, your sins are forgiven you." Luke 7:50 KJV "And HE (CHRIST) said to the woman, your faith has saved you; go in peace." Luke 8:48 KJV "And HE (CHRIST) said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort: your faith has made you whole; go in peace." Luke 17:19 KJV "And HE (CHRIST) said unto him, Arise, go your way: your faith has made you whole." Luke 18:42 KJV "And JESUS said unto him, Receive your sight: your faith has saved you."
@@danielsaenz5570 1 John 4:2 KJV Hereby you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 and every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist. Note: GOD was manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16 KJV) as the SON of GOD, JESUS CHRIST, to shed HIS real blood and give HIS real body on a real cross once for the forgiveness of all sins for whosoever believes. (Hebrews KJV chapters 9 and 10.) In complete contradiction to this, the RCC teaches that CHRIST comes in a wafer as often as a priest pleases.
@@jacktracy8356there is always a price to be paid. And I’m not listening to a TH-cam Protestant when there’s 2,000 years of tradition that speaks contrary to your personal judgement.
It is shameful of the SSPX to denounce Viganò.
Why, wasn't he ordained in the NO right?
@@toddpund5761wasn't he conditionally ordained in the Traditional rite?
@HomealonerHill I'm not sure. I heard rumors but never heard 💯....
@HomealonerHill he was born in 1941 so most likely originally ordained after 1969....when new rites went into effect...unless a traditional bishop somehow ordained him..the rumor I heard he may have recently been conditionally ordained...not sure.
Day by day. Today an authority of the novus ordo religion has said a big truth. Courageous!
For Archbishop Vigano to speak his truth, notwithstanding extreme penalties, demonstrates his heartfelt integrity. He refuses to be threatened. That is powerful.
Because sspx is united with Bergolio
One man with a backbone
SHAME on the Cardinals for not speaking out.
Thank you for clearly speaking out in behalf of Archbishop Vigano.
May GOD Almighty Father Richly Bless And Protect You Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano In Yeshua Jesus Christ's Precious Saviour's Name Shalom And Amen!✝️✝️🛐🛐😇🌟🤗🙏🙏🙏🇨🇦🇮🇱♾️🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🗽🦅❤❤❤‼️
Looking forward to this!
THANK YOU FOR THIS VIDEO, IVE WAITED 10 YEARS AND MORE FOR THE TRUTH TO BE TOLD.
At the 6:45 mark they talk about the SSPX coming out with a letter distancing themselves from Vigano. I have done a Google search going over 7 pages and find many news sights saying the same, but I have not found the SSPX letter saying it. The SSPX has nothing on the subject. What is the source for this news that the SSPX has come out with a letter distancing themselves from Vigano?
God bless and help true Catholic priests! True men of God!
Amen! I shall say my Rosary for them! ❤🙌❤
God Bless Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano! I stand with him.
Thank you so much , Jesus Lord , come in Glory ! 😢 Take care of everything Oh God Almighty Father .
Ha ha ha😂 love that comment bishop Sanborn the only thing You want to discuss with the modernists in the vatican is when they're packing their bags!! 😂 love it.
The blessed sacrament is the center of the Catholic church!
Not the Pope. Thanks!
Yes if Lefevbre were alive today, he would be sedevacantist
Thank God for Archbishop Vigano!
Grateful to hear this.
One real highlight for me in this video (other than the extraordinary news) is His Excellency's amazing humility in saying "I was impatient." Speaks to a noble heart, me thinks.
God bless Archbishop Vigano. 🙏
Denying the truth is the sad part. Sometimes the intricacies of one's thinking can hinder one from seeing the truth when in fact it is stated in plain and simple language. Pax
Archbishop Vigano gave clear reasons why he holds his rightful ruling.
Blessed be God!
Excellency , will you reach out to him about this.
It would be interesting if the groundswell for Sedevacantism as a result of Abo. Vigano’s “excommunication” were to take hold in the conservative new “Mass” goers instead of the SSPX resistance camp.
Indeed this pope got to go thank youexcelency you are a good faithful man of God
What a coincidence. Both JB’s need to step down or be removed from office.
I wonder if Vegano actually was following Bishop Sanbornes pod cast?
I wonder if they have met.
Agreed because it was the very next day that Bishop Vigano replied.
Thank you so much
Vigano is a real deal! God bless him! I pray for him and his protection every day!
Thank you! God bless❤
Thanks be to God
Thank you😊
Asking for the release and publication of the Gagnon Report.
Thank you so much for posting this so quickly after Abp. Vigano's statement. Blessed be God!❤
God bless Archbishop Vigano! He has told the truth
This vigarista is braking the Vows of Obedience to the Catholic Church.
SSPX are cowards.
If they are with Satan, are not with Christ
That is a good point: Viganò can not be in schism if he does not recognise Bergoglio as pope.
@@EdwardBray-i1w Funny, you just brought up the subject of culpability.
@@EdwardBray-i1w Bishop Sanborn merely teaches the same Catholic doctrines which were taught up until the Modernist heretics took over the Vatican. And the Modernists’ Novus Ordo Mass is a protestantised Mass which was actually designed with input from Protestant ministers.
The Novus Ordo Mass is a protestantised Mass, and Bishop Sanborn adheres to all traditional, ages-old Catholic teaching. @@EdwardBray-i1w
@@EdwardBray-i1wBishop Sanborn is just as much of a bishop (if not more) than Vigano, by literal definition. You don't have to like or agree with Sanborn, but have some respect for the title.
@@JesusChrist-wo8osBy the same logic, Viganò cannot be an archbishop if he does not recognise Pope Francis as pope.
I hope you are all ready for the upcoming "Ex-Cathedra" declaration.
Where was the Holy Spirit during Vatican II ? Had he already abandoned the Church? I thought the Church has been guided by the Holy Spirit. Now, with all these issues about Vatican II, and the Pope not being the pope, should we continue to accept the Church's teachings as true? How do we know which decisions were guided by the Holy Spirit and which were not?
The Church has never defined who or what is holding back the Antichrist in 2 Thessalonians 2:7. One opinion is that it is the pope. If this is true, then by God's decree, this mysterious Antichrist can only appear when there is no pope to restrain him.
Stephen’s suit (and pocket square) must be at the dry cleaners…🤔
Team Vigano !! 💕
We as faithful to our Catholic Faith, needed the chastisement of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church for the salvation of souls. The errors, heresies, and lies of the apostate leaders in Vatican especially the heretic Bergoglio misled many ignorant people to eternal damnation of souls. We have observed the deafening silence of many Cardinals and Bishops who are indifferent, just blindly obey and blindly follow without thinking their apostate antipope Bergoglio of his errors, heresies, and lies. "The blind guides the blind will both fall into the ditch." You are guilty of the "Sin of Ommission."
In my understanding, Viganò said that Bergoglio is no pope but didn’t say anything about the previous cv2 “popes”. Is it possible a “collaboration”/“dialogue”/etc between our position (cassiciacum) and his? How?
Thank you
As far as I can tell, no-he needs to condemn the previous Vatican to “popes” as well in order to be consistent. Lack of consistency is a sure sign of error.
There is no vacant Pope, since Viganò is it
One thing I know for sure, I will not follow a false leader who lets a false god pachamama be adored in the Vatican gardens.
Thank you, very clear.
This watershed moment with AB Vigano may be the "real" recognize & resist time for the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. 🙏
Now I have a doubt, if popes after Vatican 2 council are not true popes or their election null and void, then all the bishops, archbishops and cardinals are also null and and void as they are elected by pope including archbishop vigano. Then how can he himself archbishop. Clarify.
Deo gratias.
I was confirmed, sub conditione, by a SSPX Bishop. Was this a valid confirmation in the eyes of God & the Church?
As long as the bishop's name was not Vitus Huonder, you are definitely confirmed
Yes
sadly no !! follow the Church's teaching. Read the catechism
No problem! So long as it wasn’t by Bp. Huonder, no problem. The other bishops were consecrated by Archbishop LeFebvre, unless you hold his meaningless excommunication to be true. Even if you did, your confirmation is valid but not licit according to the n.o.
If you were “confirmed” by Vitus Huonder, or even by an SSPX bishop using oils “consecrated” by Vitus Huonder (happened these past 2 years), there is a positive doubt. Otherwise, no worries.
The Occupier of the highest chair on Earth has participated in numerous gatherings "outside" the church, including those at Saint Gallen, Switzerland, where now infamous group of high level of hierarchy ; they met to plan and execute those plans to take over the church from inside out!!!
Let’s see what all the anti-Sedevacantist Catholic celebrities are going to say about this. SSPV❤️
I fully agree. Not only that, early on Bergolio said "don't call me that," with regard to being Christ's man on earth. He added, 'my name is Bergolio.'
Do the research.
Totally agree with Vigano and sspx is weak and disgraceful for their support of bergolio and not speaking out the truth as the Archbishop would have!
Thank you .
Who are 2 other sedevacantist prelates that we can listen to on YT or other platform in the meantime?
Catholic Family Podcast often has sedevacantist clerics on for interviews (such as Bp. Charles McGuire, CMRI priests, etc).
There also the sermons uploaded by @traditionalcatholicsermons8507.
Unfortunately, Archbishop Viganò holds many other opinions and positions, which are not theological at all, but which not will be helpful for the credibillity of the sediprivationist thesis, I think.
God chose and prepare Viganò as vicar of Christ, as it it now
@@rubenangelvarisco9719 I am sure, this is the last thing that will happen.
There already was times of confusion, Assisi abomination etc., and there was archbishop Thuc, but he wasn't change situation in Vatican. So, why "archbishop" Vigano could change something?
Because he is the vicar of Christ
I agree this is major. But, sadly, I doubt much will come of it. The hope is it will "mainstream" the sedevancantists/privationist reality, but I just don't think many people or clerics will jump on board his train. I hope I'm wrong. Wouldn't be the first time...
I think you are right. R&R people are too cowardly to profess the full catholic faith.
They want to be recognized and be in communion with heretics, and yet they refuse communion with us.
Repent and come back home to the true church. Pride divides, humility heals.
The Church, founded by Our Lord Himself, is incapable of teaching error or leading souls astray. But the Modernists who have usurped the positions of (apparent) authority in the Church are doing just that. So what’s there to “come back home” to, especially in view of Our Lord’s warning in Mt. 24:15-16?
And Repent of what, exactly?
What do you mean by "the true church"? The 'church' that teaches religious liberty, ecumenism and collegiality? The 'church' that gives communion to adulterers and blesses sodomites? The 'church' that does not require faith for salvation? The 'church' that persecutes Vigano and promotes Fr. Martin?
@@mhtseminary The Church founded by Jesus Christ and handed to Peter. The same church that gave you the faith you’ve broken away from. The same Church that POPE Francis leads today. As flawed as the church may be, the gates of hell will not prevail against it.
@@Mega1989 🤦🏻♂️
@@tommastroianni641 when the church moved to Avignon for 70 years what would you have done? Clearly abandoned everything.
I would certainly rather have Vigano as Pope than Francis!
Vigano I will never be Pope. He is mentally unstable and besides he can’t become Pope because the bible says Satan will never destroy the Church.
You can add Bishop Sanborn to that list!
Francis is a pervert and traitor: needs be expelled to a distant monastery to do penance for the sin of misleading the flock during his fraudulent papacy.
Not a good shepherd entrusted with protecting the flock from wolves.
God elect him as Vicar of Christ
Does Vigano even offer the true Mass?
Every day.
What are the heresies that Vigano says Pope Francis has committed before and after his election to the Papacy?
Various publications that have appeared under his name are questionably orthodox.
If you are Christian, real one, you must be follow by love of Christ.
Then because this love, found by yourselves. You will discover. If not, you judge yourself
The truth about the Church is slowly regaining its rightful right to be present. As bishop Sanborn noted, it seems that bishop Vigano's statement in the future will prove to be a significant development in this process.
I feel sad for what Vigano has told Pope Francis is not a Pope. If Pope Francis is not a Pope. I M sure Vatican fall in Hierarch.
That is what I finally decided if Pope is with Christ I am either Christ but Pope Francis is not with Christ as any lay Catholic can see than I can not be with Pope Francis
Viganò speaks like a true Shepard
Pope Vigano 2024. 👍
Mirante Roma, gaudente Ecclesia!
Vigano has no authority to determine who is the Pope
God has the authority to do it through its new Vicar, Vigano
The Pope cannot be an unshakable rock if it is possible that he will teach error or that people will doubt the validity of his appointment. We must choose between obeying Pope Francis or believing the Promise made to Peter to be false.
The problem we face extends beyond Catholicism. It is, in general, that of FAITH. What we believe, we believe because of its plausibility, that is to say, its conformity with opinions that we hold to be true. This means that if these prior convictions no longer seem as certain to us, or if the object of our faith no longer presents the characteristics which made it seem worthy of faith, our fidelity has lost its rational basis. We thought we had chosen a good path, but along the way we no longer know whether we should go forward or turn back.
The Pope cannot teach error. We sedevacantists base our position on the infallibility and indefectibility of the Church. Which is what leads to the necessary conclusion that Jorge Bergoglio, while validly elected, does not possess the form of the papacy-the authority from God to teach, rule, and sanctify-on account of the obstacle he has placed in the way of his reception of that authority. This obstacle is the man’s objective intention to impose a false, non-Catholic religion (Vatican II/the Novus Ordo) on the Church; again, a Pope cannot teach error. The same goes for Bergoglio’s Vatican II predecessors (John XXIII to BXVI). Therefore, he is not a true pope.
@@tommastroianni641 Without a Pope, there is no unshakable rock either. That was the point of my first sentence. False Pope = no Pope = no unshakable rock = no infallibility for the CHURCH. Bad foundations = no foundations => the entire building can collapse => it was NOT different from non divine buildings => christianity is a false religion. IF now we start reasoning with the assertion that it MUST be true, the logical conclusion is that Pope Francis must be right in whatever he teaches…
@@jonathanb.6926 - you have it backwards: it is *because* he is the Pope he is therefore protected by the Holy Ghost from teaching error. That we’re currently deprived of a reigning Pope (i.e., the visible head of the Church) has no bearing on the infallibility of the Church. There were three years of interregnum following the death of Clement IV in 1268. Did the Church cease to be infallible during that time? Or what about the periods of interregnum following the deaths of every other Pope? What we’re dealing with now is unprecedented in the history of the Church: men who possess valid elections to the Papacy but who have not received the authority from God to rule owing to their objective intention to impose a false religion, thus rendering them false popes despite all appearances to the contrary. This is now the longest interregnum in history and God is permitting it, of course, for a greater good. To instead say that God has given authority to a true Pope who, in turn, uses that authority to lead souls astray through false teachings and disciplines-as the Vatican II anti-popes have done-is infinitely worse than a 65-plus year interregnum (and counting).
@@tommastroianni641 If the guardian of the unity of the Church fails, either because he teaches errors or because his position remains vacant, the Church is no longer protected against disintegration. It is no longer infallible. The proof that the Church is no longer infallible during the vacancy of the apostolic see is that, during this period, the Church does not perform any act which requires the grace of infallibility. Besides, if the Church could be infallible without having a pope at its head, why would we care about having one?
The difference between the crises of the past and the apostasy of Rome since V2 is that it is not the papacy alone that has turned its back on the traditional faith of the Catholic Church, but almost the entire high clergy - and this, of his own free will. I wonder where the infallibility of the ecclesiastical magisterium would have taken refuge if it was attached neither to the apostolic see nor to the communion of bishops of the whole world...
There is one fact which proves that the Church is not infallible and never has been: it has used its supposedly infallible authority to teach things contrary to its traditional teaching. It was not a false pope, then another false pope and a series of false popes who did this; it is, with all these so-called vicars of Jesus Christ, the overwhelming majority of depositaries of apostolic authority = thousands of bishops. Were they, too, false bishops?
I know the sedevacantist solution very well. It interested me at first. But ultimately I find it too far-fetched. I see another much more likely and coherent; this solution is that the Church had never been protected from any of the evils from which other societies can suffer. If the Church had remained faithful to certain beliefs for a long time, this was not due to a supernatural privilege, but to the same destiny which causes ancient constructions to remain standing for centuries before finally collapsing.
The moral duty, for those who thought they needed it to find God, is to understand why they thought that. The end of their dismay is not to be able to breathe new life into a past which is now dead. It is rather to examine more closely the first foundation of Christianity, namely the mediation of Jesus Christ in the work of our salvation. The Church was originally built to spread the "good news" of an imminent salvation that never happened... It is for this purely virtual salvation that Jesus is considered a savior. Is it really serious to rest our eternal destiny on something so inconsistent?
@@jonathanb.6926 Pure Modernist drivel.
If he really believes Francis is not pope it just shows how delusional he is. He should join the Q Anon brigade who believe Trump is still president & JFK is secretly his VP. Vigano probably believes that as well
If the result of the last Conclave was due to a conspiracy then the validity of the election is questionable.
No - there cannot be two vicars of Christ. Tying anyone to political nonsense and ideology is ridiculous. It is immaturely smearing your opponent. This goes back to the 60s when TLM was eliminated and the Church fell apart and vocations plummeted as well as Catholic Education which is evangelization commanded by Christ. Vigano is correct. V2 was in error. Benedict's death does not make Francis valid because Benedict was banished for globalists, and open borders to monetize Catholic Charities and infiltrate the US for political purposes and help with wiping out Western European culture as well as the US. One must ask how many cardinal's votes were bought to "install" Francis.
Thank you for stating the facts amidst this blogs sea of errors based upon Vigano's positions of error
@@laabt7610 - Ever hear that there can be only one Vicar of Christ? Did Christ choose two St. Peter figures? No, it is not the royal heir-and-a-spare lineup. A lot of people agree with Vigano, for exactly that reason, and the number is not small. Bishops are political people. They know there will be retribution if they speak out. They just want to keep the peace. Upstarts lose their credentials and are often banished to far flung parts for the earth as punishment.
@@laabt7610
Are you qualified in Canon Law ?
Rebellion does not work in the Catholic Church. There is the elected Pope by the Cardinals and the Holy Spirit. Then the Vow of Obedience to the Pope.
However, the person elected can place an obstacle to his election. We argue that a defect of consent is present in “Vatican II popes”.
Rebellion against God is a crime.
Vigano is not the criminal, but the others which are in Vatican today
There are more than one billion people who recognize Pope Francis as the head of the Catholic Church.
thethesis.us/chapter-xiv/
And ONE GOD who refuse him
Vilano is coveting the papacy. He is jealous of the one true pope.
Luke 5:20 JKV "And when HE (CHRIST) saw their faith, HE said unto him, Man, your sins are forgiven you."
Luke 7:50 KJV "And HE (CHRIST) said to the woman, your faith has saved you; go in peace."
Luke 8:48 KJV "And HE (CHRIST) said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort: your faith has made you whole; go in peace."
Luke 17:19 KJV "And HE (CHRIST) said unto him, Arise, go your way: your faith has made you whole."
Luke 18:42 KJV "And JESUS said unto him, Receive your sight: your faith has saved you."
Faith and works Jack. Their faith cause them to merit the forgiveness of Christ.
@@danielsaenz5570 1 John 4:2 KJV Hereby you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 and every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist.
Note: GOD was manifest in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16 KJV) as the SON of GOD, JESUS CHRIST, to shed HIS real blood and give HIS real body on a real cross once for the forgiveness of all sins for whosoever believes. (Hebrews KJV chapters 9 and 10.)
In complete contradiction to this, the RCC teaches that CHRIST comes in a wafer as often as a priest pleases.
@@jacktracy8356there is always a price to be paid. And I’m not listening to a TH-cam Protestant when there’s 2,000 years of tradition that speaks contrary to your personal judgement.
@@Dr.Weezil Try to keep in mind that you are responding the the very WORDS of CHRIST WHO is GOD made flesh not to me HIS lowly servant.
𝚃𝚑𝚒𝚛𝚝𝚎𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚑 𝚁𝚞𝚕𝚎 of Exercises of St Ignatius:
𝚃𝚘 𝚋𝚎 𝚛𝚒𝚐𝚑𝚝 𝚒𝚗 𝚎𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚢𝚝𝚑𝚒𝚗𝚐, 𝚠𝚎 𝚘𝚞𝚐𝚑𝚝 𝚊𝚕𝚠𝚊𝚢𝚜 𝚝𝚘 𝚑𝚘𝚕𝚍 𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚝 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚠𝚑𝚒𝚝𝚎 𝚠𝚑𝚒𝚌𝚑 𝙸 𝚜𝚎𝚎, 𝚒𝚜 𝚋𝚕𝚊𝚌𝚔, 𝚒𝚏 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝙷𝚒𝚎𝚛𝚊𝚛𝚌𝚑𝚒𝚌𝚊𝚕 𝙲𝚑𝚞𝚛𝚌𝚑 𝚜𝚘 𝚍𝚎𝚌𝚒𝚍𝚎𝚜 𝚒𝚝, 𝚋𝚎𝚕𝚒𝚎𝚟𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚝𝚑𝚊𝚝 𝚋𝚎𝚝𝚠𝚎𝚎𝚗 𝙲𝚑𝚛𝚒𝚜𝚝 𝚘𝚞𝚛 𝙻𝚘𝚛𝚍, 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝙱𝚛𝚒𝚍𝚎𝚐𝚛𝚘𝚘𝚖, 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝙲𝚑𝚞𝚛𝚌𝚑, 𝙷𝚒𝚜 𝙱𝚛𝚒𝚍𝚎, 𝚝𝚑𝚎𝚛𝚎 𝚒𝚜 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚜𝚊𝚖𝚎 𝚂𝚙𝚒𝚛𝚒𝚝 𝚠𝚑𝚒𝚌𝚑 𝚐𝚘𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚗𝚜 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚍𝚒𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚜 𝚞𝚜 𝚏𝚘𝚛 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚜𝚊𝚕𝚟𝚊𝚝𝚒𝚘𝚗 𝚘𝚏 𝚘𝚞𝚛 𝚜𝚘𝚞𝚕𝚜. 𝙱𝚎𝚌𝚊𝚞𝚜𝚎 𝚋𝚢 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚜𝚊𝚖𝚎 𝚂𝚙𝚒𝚛𝚒𝚝 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚘𝚞𝚛 𝙻𝚘𝚛𝚍 𝚆𝚑𝚘 𝚐𝚊𝚟𝚎 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝚝𝚎𝚗 𝙲𝚘𝚖𝚖𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚖𝚎𝚗𝚝𝚜, 𝚘𝚞𝚛 𝚑𝚘𝚕𝚢 𝙼𝚘𝚝𝚑𝚎𝚛 𝚝𝚑𝚎 𝙲𝚑𝚞𝚛𝚌𝚑 𝚒𝚜 𝚍𝚒𝚛𝚎𝚌𝚝𝚎𝚍 𝚊𝚗𝚍 𝚐𝚘𝚟𝚎𝚛𝚗𝚎𝚍.
Paul talks much more clear than him.
Infact the "J'Accusse" document from Vicar Viganò, starts with the anathema from Paul.
Of course he's NOT!!!!.
He's the son of belzebub.
Bergoglio is it