Skip to main content

ARCHBISHOP VIGANÒ FORMALLY ACCUSES JORGE MARIO BERGOGLIO OF HERESY AND SCHISM - https://canon212.com/

ARCHBISHOP VIGANÒ FORMALLY ACCUSES JORGE MARIO BERGOGLIO OF HERESY AND SCHISM - https://canon212.com/

Comments

Praypraypray said…
Some will reject this immediately, because it came from Archbishop Vigano.
Regardless of what anyone thinks about Archbishop Vigano,
What he’s saying is church teaching…
according to a papal bull of Pope Paul IV

It states that anyone who is a heretic cannot be elevated to ecclesiastical Church offices…

Read it below…

The Bull Cum ex apostolatus officio of Paul IV established in perpetuity the nullity of the nomination or election of any Prelate - including the Pope - who had fallen into heresy before his promotion to Cardinal or elevation to Roman Pontiff. It defines the promotion or elevation as nulla, irrita et inanis - void, invalid, and without any value - "even if it took place with the agreement and unanimous consent of all the Cardinals; nor can it be said that it is validated by the receipt of the office, consecration, or
possession [...], or by the putative enthronement [...] of the Roman Pontiff himself or by the
obedience given to him by all and by the course of any duration of time in the said exercise of his office."
Renato said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Renato said…
There is something darker in Viganò than this ideological sedevacantism that is now becoming increasingly clear; I think it is far worse than using Archbishop Lefebvre to insinuate that the council popes are heretics and apostates.

It was necessary for an Italian journalist to retrieve a piece of writing from Viganò, a kind of screenshot of the deleted page on the old Twitter, which clearly said that these were apostates and heretics.

For he is like a serpent that insinuates here and there; The interested party, however, will not find anything clear from him with this.

And to get out in the field of speculation is what is desired here.

Thus there is another controversy between sedevacantists and traditionalists in relation to Viganò, but in my country. It refers to this: Viganò, Williamsom and Dugin.

Certainly neither the Italian archbishop nor the English bishop have answered what they intend with the Satanist and Gnostic of Dugin.

What is this expectation about a coming of the "Third Rome" between the two?

---
https://x.com/Agdchan/status/1501375910896930818

https://pch24.pl/abp-carlo-maria-vigano-dugin-dla-katolikow/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjulG8s0Qv4&t=357s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nQeEGsCf7U&t=4193s

Anonymous said…
I will just say that there is a way to rejected Francis without implying that the Catholic Church defected a few years ago.
Bergoglio's apostate, schismatic and heretical past alone demonstrates that this impostor has defied the laws of God and the Church before his invalid election in Argentina.

https://gloria.tv/post/Fa8RY1dQhwQb3tkSaN3ra46MJ

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...