This interview was recorded before Abp. Viganò's latest statement (June 28th). We plan to record a follow-up episode to address further developments. Stay tuned.
Thank you Father, many of us look forward to it. There was also a statement before “J'Accuse”, in which the Archbishop wrote that he “does not recognise the authority of the Dicastery, of its Prefect, and of the one who appointed him (Bergoglio)”.
Excuse me, your comparison is very wide of the mark! Vigano has excommunicated himself many times over. He does not want to be part of the Catholic Church. Pope Francis opened a full investigation of Rupnik's actions, which is still on-going.
I have been deeply impressed with Vigano’s courage. Where are the voices of other bishops? I could be wrong, but I’m not aware of any. He has dated to publicly address the corruption regardless of the personal cost to him. If he phrases his opinion with questions, perhaps that expresses some humility or perhaps his goal is to encourage consideration among those who either don’t see the corruption or disagree with his position. Whatever the “weakness” may be in his formal statement, I applaud his courage for speaking the truth and saying what many of us believe.
Huh? I guess I don’t pay much attention to the interviewer’s clothing! Yes, though, a suit and tie looks good. As for the Bishop, he wears a bishop’s outfit.
i love how sedevacantist make a reason..it shows how truly catholic they are compared to the reasoning of other trad groups who are a quiet and most likely to join the v2 laws...It clearly shows the sedevacantist have the real faith.
Dear Stephen and Your Excellency, thank you for this commentary, but it seems that things are moving fast and Msgr Vigano has made his stance clearer since. His statement on 20th June includes this sentence, “... the Dicastery, whose authority I do not recognize, nor that of its Prefect, nor of the one who nominated him.” And just a few hours ago, he released a new and strongly-worded statement, which includes these lines (machine translated): “I strongly reject the accusation [...] that I have removed myself from the supreme Authority of the Vicar of Christ: to separate myself from ecclesial communion with Jorge Mario Bergoglio, I would have to have first been in communion with him, which is not possible since Bergoglio himself cannot be considered a member of the Church.” “I accuse Jorge Mario Bergoglio of heresy and schism, and as a heretic and schismatic I ask that he be judged and removed from the Throne that he has unworthily occupied for over eleven years. This does not contradict in any way the adage Prima Sedes a nemine judicatur , because it is evident that a heretic, insofar as he is unable to assume the Papacy, is not above the Prelates who judge him.” I hope that we will be able to hear Bp. Sanborn's follow-up commentary on these two newer letters. God bless.
"The Council is the source of all the rot." vs Cardinal Ratzinger "There is no one who is a Catholic or who wishes to remain one who can doubt the greatness, the richness, the timeliness of the documents of Vatican II." --I'll agree with your much shorter statement.
A question that’s weighing on my mind - when Francis dies and there is a papal “election”, how will we know if he is a true pope? Will he need to eliminate V2 teachings? Will V2 need to be burned before the new “pope” is installed? At what point is the seat filled?
By dogmatic fact of universal acceptance of pope by Church. If is pope after election widely recognized by Church as pope, it gives infallible certainity that he is true pope.
Archbishop Viganò, seems to me, is trying to walk a fine line. He is trying to stay "inside the tent" while criticizing the direction since V2, but more specifically since Francis ... is that really so terrible? Maybe a stronger statement is still to come?
Your Excellency, I have heard nearly every sermon of yours and thank you so much. I have a question if you could answer it at some point in the future. I have found every pope since the Virgin Mary's appearance at Fatima requiring to reveal the third secret at the proper time which was the 60s. And no pope all the way back...much further than Vatican II always refused to obey the Virgin Mary's request. And so I have a problem with these popes also. I would treasure your opinion on this and thank you sir, Nancy
60s, was the time given by Sr Lucie, through her intuition, not by the Blessed Virgin Mother. To my understanding, it was for preparing the VCII. Because of Vatican decided it was too risky to release the simple explanation given by the Blessed Virgin Mother on the image that three children saw, the Vatican council II was done partially what God has intended. Basically I can resume the 3rd secret to one phrase: The hierarchy of the church was too far away from the simple Truth. Or as Pope Francis said: some people have made heaven very difficult for others to enter. He was not referring to political leaders, but spiritual leaders, priests and bishops. Know that the error of Jansenism was by a very popular archbishop, Saint Thérèse of Lisieux was both a victim and a remedy for this error. Sr Lucie has written a book called "calls of the Message of Fatima", you can get it from the bookstore of the sanctuary of Fatima, in various languages. It is worth it to even just glance at the table of contents.
The Latin Mass, founded by JHS Himself, is the redemption of humanity. How then the novus ordo, founded by bugnini, was not removed instantly since represent the liturgy of masons wanting the anullement of the sacrifice of the Cross?
@@tiff3344My friend, Jesus is God and therefore knows all languages and can speak Latin. He dialogued with Pontius Pilate in Latin. Most of the Apostles could read and write in Latin. All of them could speak Latin. They could all speak Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic as well. Most of them could write in all these languages languages, and many other languages. Latin is the universal and official language of the Church. It is also the language of heaven because whatever is bound on Earth is bound in heaven by the Pope. Pope St. Damasus made Latin the official language of the Catholic Church in the third century. Lastly, Latin is the fulfillment of one of the four marks of the Church, one holy Catholic and Apostolic. The Church is Catholic, meaning universal, because all her sacraments and liturgy are performed in the same language of the Church, Latin, no matter what country or culture you are in the language of the Church is Latin and the sacraments and liturgy are performed in Latin. The third Mark of the Church, is fulfilled with Latin. That is why the Vatican 2 novus ordo Sect is not Catholic, it doesn't even use the language of the Church in its liturgy and sacraments Also, Catholic liturgy is worship of God and meant to please God. The novus ordo was created with the expressed purpose to be pleasing to Jews and Protestants who are enemies of God and the Church since they reject Catholicism. How can a liturgy be created to be pleasing to the enemies of God instead of pleasing God? It is apostasy. It is a direct denial of the dogma of indefectibility from Vatican 1, that the Church cannot cause harm in her doctrine, discipline and liturgy. This is why the novus ordo is not Catholic, it is apostasy. Catholic liturgy is meant to worship and please God alone. It is impossible for the true Church to create Catholic liturgy to please the enemies of God because of the dogma of indefectability. Therefore the men who created the novus ordo are not Catholic, they excommunicated themselves because they wanted to please heretics. I hope this helps, I will pray for you.
A Facebook old "Catholic" asked me after observing my comments on FB if I wanted to be an Old "Catholic" "Priest". 😎😎😂😂😂😂😂😂 Not much of a contemplation period. If I'm lying I'm dying
Viganò did NOT say he was with Abp Lefebvre on every issue, and he NOWHERE mentions the SSPX. He only refers to what Abp Lefebvre said “50 years ago”, which points SOLELY to the 1974 declaration. He does not refer to the whole of Abp Lefebvre’s career. So he endorses the words of the declaration, which Lefebvre backed down from in saying he was angry. Abp Viganò is AFFIRMING THE VERY STATEMENT WHICH BISHOP SANBORN APPLAUDED AND STILL APPLAUDS. So how on earth can he say Viganò is being UNCLEAR when he is publicly subscribed to the unambiguous words which Bo Sanborn ALSO says ARE HIS OWN???
@@tommastroianni641 Because the SSPX leadership are lying revisionists, rewriting their own history to excuse. Nonsensical positions like accepting faculties from Bergoglio for confession, among other things. Lefebvre said both Sede thungs and non-Sede things. The contemporary SSPX wants it both ways: to get some approvals from the man they say is pontiff while maintaining their own network of chapels and seminaries completely outside of the jurisdiction of Rome. They say “we’re in communion with Rome,” which they use to reassure people - but priests from the Bergoglian communion do not come to SSPX churches, and he SSPX does not in act recognize the sacraments, & tell people that they endanger their faith if they go to the Novus Ordo rite. THey are in a self-contradictory position, wanting to have it both ways. Viganò makes i impossible for anyone to maintain such a contradictory position.
I understand that V II is not a dogmatic coucil. It was never called dogmatic or infalible. It was called pastoral only, which it was never done before.
I wish that with all respect that the people who conduct these interviews for the sake of us who are not theologians, could say who is right and why, what the truth is about Pope Francis being the true pope
Maybe give it another listen or two. And check out the other videos on the channel. I know it can be a little tricky at first, but eventually you’ll get it.
I think Clergy in novus ordo, Sspx , etc should submit themselves to a Catholic (sede/ bod-bob) Bishop, go through process of abjuration, education, re ordination etc If I lay dying, an SSPX, Vigano, cancelled priest came to me for Last Rites, I'd say please leave me. Try to make an act if contrition. And then Our Lady of Sorrows would send me real Catholic clergy. Sspx, cancelled priests have nothing spiritual to offer, except baptism/marriages.
Nowhere does Viganò ever refer to Bergoglio as Vicar of Christ, nowhere does he call him “Holy Father” and he said in October that EVERY CATHOLIC MUST REFUSE ANY COOPERATION WITH HIM, EVEN INDIRECT”, that hvery clearly SAYS ABSOLUTELY ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE SAYING HE DID NOT SAY!!!!!!!!!
There is NO Pope named Francis! Bishop Vigano should say "I want the true Pope make the decision in this case".. This the problem with church, Bergoglio is not a Pope, the election had 6 archbishop's in conclave.
I'd really like to know how lay Catholics who have received all their sacraments accordingly to NO rites (me) can, well, be part of the Catholic Church. I'd like the Bishop (or at least a priest) help me with some questions: Is the Bishop of my diocese a valid Bishop? Are my priest and deacons? Am I even baptized - the water run on my scalp, no problem with that. Is there any way a NO mass can be valid so maybe I can find one? Can I validly receive the Eucharist? Were my confessions valid? I was baptized only about 2 years ago, so Catholicism is new to me, let alone sedevacantism(s). (Or do you have a Q&A on a website or something? 😅)
These are confusing times. I was in a similar situation as you are in and only very recently have, I finally settled with the Sedeacantist position as adopted by Bishop Sanborn, after extensive on-line research on the various sedes. websites. I don't live near any of these priests but if you do, pay them a visit or contact them on-line after you have done your research. Sorry but I am not computer savvy, my knowledge is very basic. A prayer to the Holy Ghost offered through the hands of Our Lady will help. God bless.
For the sacrament of baptism if the priest poored the water on the skin or forehead saying the form of the sacrament correctly: .....I baptise you in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost....than your baptism is valid... First communion in the N.O is invalid, the last rites....If you have received the sacrament of confirmation by a N.O bishop ordained in 1968 or later...surely invalid.
This is completely dishonest, I’m afraid. Viganò never calls him “Holy Father or “pope,” and he says he’s glad NOT to be in communion with Bergoglio, but IS in communion with the real Church. This is a misrepresentation of Vigano’s VERY CLEAR STATEMENTS , for what reason? He is NOT “dancing around” the question AT ALL.
So I am still confused so if in order to be catholic catholics have to accept the Pope then what does that say about sedevacantism? I'm sorry I'm just trying to understand.
Sedevacantism does not accept Bergoglio as being a legitimate Pope because he does not uphold basic Catholic dogma. Catholics do not have to accept the Pope in order to be “Catholic” - There have been many Popes that were not worthy of the position. If a “doctor” doesn’t know anatomy and doesn’t practice within the laws of the medical profession, you wouldn’t allow him to cut you open, right? Well, this Pope is THAT doctor. That doesn’t destroy the entire medical profession, it just say’s the profession has a bad doctor that needs to be removed.
If the position of Sedevacantism is held while there is a valid Pope in office, one would be a schismatic. I hope that helps. (BTW, the Catholic Church does currently have a Pope (Francis), I just like to watch Sanborn vids)
@@Byzntinhart - to be Catholic, one must (among other things) submit to the Pope. However, Bergoglio and his Vatican II predecessors are/were not true popes on account of their objective intention to impose a false religion on the Church. Therefore, the Chair has been empty since the death of Pius XII in 1958 and there is presently no pope to whom a Catholic can/must submit. What’s schismatic is those who regard Bergoglio as the Roman Pontiff with the authority from God to teach, rule, and sanctify and yet resist him in his teachings and decrees. Sedevacantists are simply those who practice the Catholic faith given the circumstances in which the Church finds itself. When there’s a Pope, we will submit to him. But as long as Bergoglio and his successors continue to place an obstacle in the way of their reception of the authority from God to teach, rule, and sanctify (i.e., the form of the Papacy) we will just have to patiently wait and pray. God bless.
In order to be Catholic you have to accept the authority of the Papacy as an office. Sedevacantists certainly do accept this. Saying that Bergoglio is not the true Pope certainly does not mean we reject the Papacy, just the validity of this specific man. In fact, if we didn't accept the authority of the Papacy, it wouldn't matter to us whether or not he was legitimate :) hope that helps to clarify!
@@pookah5841therefore, you should submit entirely to Bergoglio if you accept him as a true Vicar of Christ, even he denied the existence of hell as one of his many heretical teachings. The fact of the matter is he is teaching a false non-Catholic doctrine so use your moral judgment.
Your Excellency, I'm in the FSSP, but I know Bergoglio is NOT Pope, but the FSSP Say's he is Pope. They do the 62 Latin/Roman Tridentine Mass. My question now is are the Mass and Sacraments Val-lid or Illicit ? I wish you Sedevacantists were in Rhode Island as this is where we are and there's only 1 Traditional parish here.
I think Bishop Sanborn's position would be FSSP sacraments and Masses are invalid unless the priest is former SSPX, was ordained before 1968, or was ordained by a bishop consecrated before 1968. I suspect it would be a very small minority of FSSP priests who fit into any of these three categories.
Really? Even he is obviously teaching non-Catholic doctrine? For instance, the denial of hell, rejection of a Catholic God, and many other heretical teachings coming from his mouth. A true Pope should be Catholic wholly and entirely, and he isn't. Therefore, he is not a pope, but rather, an usurper, the anti-Pope.
@@rjrecullo627 He said that he personally likes to think of hell as empty, it is not denying hell, but hopeful universalism. I am not fan of it, but it certainly doesn’t mean he is not catholic.
Why do you call him Archbishop? Or Father for that matter? I see sedes all the time give these lower clergy a pass. They are heretics. They have lost, or never attained their office. Bishop and Priest means something very special, Holy to me.
Jesus promised that the Church, headed by the Pope, would never be conquered. To reject the Second Vatican Council is to reject the Promise of Jesus. Pope Francis is the Pope, whose ring Vigano has kissed.
@@MaxRoth-mc6nb I have. The Church has never been destroyed. The papacy has never been interrupted (not even in the long interregnum of 1268-1271). There has never been a time when a pope has reigned and later been found not to be the pope. In 1378, 17 schismatic French cardinals tried to rescind their allegiance to the pope they had elected. They started the Great Western Schism by setting up Pope Clement XVII as anti-pope in Avignon. The papal line continued in Rome, with many twists and turns of politics, including an attempt in 1409 by the cardinals of both sides to resolve the problem by calling the Council of Pisa -- although only the pope [or the emperor] could legitimately call a council -- which ended up electing a third pope. The Pisan pope called the Council of Constance in 1414, and the Roman pope approved. In 1415, the Council of Constance proclaimed (in the document "Haec sancta") that councils are above popes, under the "necessity theory". The cardinals at Constance removed the Pisan pope, the Roman pope resigned, and the Avignon pope was excommunicated. The cardinals then elected Pope Martin V in 1417, and the Western Schism was ended. Pope Pius II issued the bull "Execrabilis" in 1460, rejecting the authority of a general council to revoke any papal decree. Conciliarism was later definitively condemned by the Fifth Lateran Council (1512-1517). As stated in this video, one cannot be in communion with the Church without being in communion with the pope.
Vigano has gotten it wrong. Catch 22 of schism or heresy. He should submit to a sede Bishop. He's done enough damage to souls. And he's getting old. CREDIT! He knows a ton on nwo, fascinating.
Im so tired of this Vigano. He is moving like a snake. Talking in riddles. It's not catholic. He has shady connetctions to Opus Dei. He is a perfect figure to takeover real opposition to V2 and make it a controlled opposition.
