Analysis of the Statement of Archbishop C. M. Viganò on the situation in the Church /Part 2: Christ’s Church versus Bergoglio’s antichurch/

Watch this video on: https://vkpatriarhat.org/en/?p=24586

Subscribe to BCP newsletters https://bit.ly/3cJLzzm

Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “We find ourselves in the surreal situation in which a Hierarchy calls itself Catholic and therefore demands obedience from the ecclesial body, while at the same time professing doctrines that before the Council the Church had condemned; and at the same time condemning doctrines as heretical that up until then had been taught by all the Popes.”
With this statement, Archbishop Viganò de facto shows that the current hierarchy, which calls itself Catholic, is no longer Catholic. He convicts it of professing heresies which it is obliged to condemn and condemning Catholic doctrine which it is obliged to profess. By changing paradigms and adopting Fiducia supplicans, it contradicts its very essence. The Archbishop therefore points out that this hierarchy, disobedient to God, has no right to demand obedience.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “This happens when the absolute is removed from the Truth and relativized by adapting it to the spirit of the world.”
The hierarchy that calls itself Catholic is obliged to represent the authority of God. But having separated itself from the Truth by heresies and conformed to the spirit of the world, it presents the teaching of God’s truths relativized. Thus this hierarchy loses the right to act in the authority of God and demand obedience. But the visible authority of the Church is automatically regarded by Catholics as the authority of God. Bergoglio abuses this, proclaiming heresies that deny the most fundamental truths of the faith, while demanding obedience. The only solution here is to separate from this murderer of Christ’s Church.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “How would the Pontiffs of recent centuries have acted today? Would they judge me guilty of schism, or would they rather condemn the one who claims to be their Successor?”
Archbishop Viganò asks: Whom would the pre-conciliar Popes condemn – him or the apostate Bergoglio, who claims to be their Successor? The answer to this is unequivocal: they would condemn Bergoglio as an arch-heretic. On the other hand, they would recognize Archbishop Viganò as a faithful shepherd of Christ’s Church.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “Together with me, the modernist Sanhedrin judges and condemns all Catholic Popes, because the Faith that they defended is mine; and the errors that Bergoglio defends are those that they, without exception, condemned.”
By this statement the Archbishop makes it clear that he represents the orthodox teaching and orthodox tradition of the whole Church and of all Popes up to Vatican II.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “I ask myself, then: what continuity can be given between two realities that oppose and contradict each other? Between Bergoglio’s conciliar and synodal church and the one ‘blocked by counter-reformation fear’ from which he ostentatiously distances himself? And from what ‘church’ would I be in a state of schism, if the one that claims to be Catholic differs from the true Church precisely in its preaching of what She condemned and in its condemnation of what She preached?”
The Archbishop again points to the absurdity of being accused of the so-called crime of schism by a man who represents the post-conciliar synodal Church. This synodal Church is not only in schism, but directly in apostasy. Archbishop Viganò’s separation from it is his holy duty. Faithfulness to God and to the Church demands this from him. It is in no way a crime of schism!
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “The adepts of the ‘conciliar church’ will reply that this is due to the evolution of the ecclesial body in a ‘necessary renewal’; while the Catholic Magisterium teaches us that the Truth is immutable and that the doctrine of the evolution of dogmas is heretical.”
The Archbishop once again points to the errors of the so-called conciliar Church, which has introduced a kind of evolution of the ecclesial body in order to justify the proclamation of heresies. The Archbishop reiterates that the Truth itself is immutable and the doctrine of the evolution of dogmas is heretical.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “Two churches, certainly: each with its own doctrines and liturgies and saints; but whereas for the Catholic believer the Church is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, for Bergoglio the Church is conciliar, ecumenical, synodal, inclusive, immigrationist, eco-sustainable, and gay-friendly.”
Bergoglio identifies the ecclesial structure he heads with the Church of Christ. But the Archbishop stresses that today there are two Churches, each with its own doctrines. Bergoglio’s is the conciliar, synodal, sodomite one... But it is in no way the Church of Christ!
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “Is it possible then that the Church has begun to teach error? Can we believe that the one Ark of salvation is at the same time also an instrument of perdition for souls? That the Mystical Body separates itself from its Divine Head, Jesus Christ, making the Saviour’s promise fail? This cannot, of course, be admissible, and those who support such an idea fall into heresy and schism. The Church cannot teach error, nor can her Head, the Roman Pontiff, be at the same time heretical and orthodox, Peter and Judas, in communion with all his predecessors and at the same time in schism with them. The only theologically possible answer is that the Conciliar Hierarchy, which proclaims itself Catholic but embraces a faith different from that constantly taught for two thousand years by the Catholic Church, belongs to another entity and therefore does not represent the true Church of Christ.”
The Archbishop logically concludes from the facts that the Church of Christ and the Church of Bergoglio are opposites. Every bishop and priest, but also every Catholic, should realize this and draw a clear conclusion, namely: separate from Bergoglio and his sect!
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “What makes us understand that the ‘synodal church’ and its head Bergoglio do not profess the Catholic Faith? It is the total and unconditional adherence of all its members to a multiplicity of errors and heresies already condemned by the infallible Magisterium of the Catholic Church and the ostentatious rejection of any doctrine, moral precept, act of worship, and religious practice that is not sanctioned by ‘their’ council.”
Archbishop Viganò gives two proofs that the synodal Church headed by Bergoglio does not have the Catholic faith. The first proof is that it adheres totally and unconditionally to errors and heresies already condemned by the Magisterium of the Church. The second proof is that it ostentatiously rejects Catholic teaching and morals that have not been approved by “their” Council.
Jesus Christ commands the Gospel to be preached to all creation, whereas the Council has introduced dialogue. This means that the missionary must listen to pagan delusions with respect and not preach the Gospel to the pagans, so to speak, so as not to offend them. True mission, of which Jesus Christ is the foundation, centre and summit, is considered a “shameful proselytism” and the recruitment of so-called believers. The fruit of this is that the anti-mission of Hinduism through yoga has come to Europe, and also the anti-mission of Buddhism through Oriental meditation and martial arts. And the Church? The Church promotes it! This is the spirit of Vatican II, which contradicts the Spirit of Christ.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “Neither of them can in conscience subscribe to the Tridentine Profession of Faith and the Anti-Modernist Oath, because what they both express is the exact opposite of what Vatican II and the so-called ‘conciliar magisterium’ insinuate and teach.”
The Archbishop states why the faith of the synodal Church, headed by Bergoglio, is not Catholic. Neither of them can in conscience subscribe to the Tridentine Profession of Faith, which clearly expresses the immutable truths of our salvation. In keeping with the Tridentine Profession, Pope Pius X also responded to modernism that infected the Church at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. He wrote an anti-modernist oath against this heresy to be taken by every priest and every bishop. It should be known, however, that the Council, on the contrary, opened the door to the already condemned heresies of modernism and the spirit of Vatican II implanted them in all Catholic seminaries.
These modernist heresies contradict the essence of Scripture and Tradition, i.e. Catholic dogmas concerning faith and morals. Modernism has also questioned the supernatural in Scripture. The Archbishop adds that the Tridentine Profession of Faith and the Anti-Modernist Oath both express the exact opposite of what Vatican II and the so-called ‘conciliar magisterium’ insinuate and teach. Thus, the Council is heretical, the spirit of the Council is also heretical and the fruit is heretical, and Bergoglio, by his synodal way, only completes the agenda of the Council, which has nothing to do with the Catholic, i.e. the saving faith.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “Since it is not theologically tenable that the Church and the Papacy are instruments of perdition rather than of salvation, we must necessarily conclude that the heterodox teachings conveyed by the so-called ‘conciliar church’ and the ‘popes of the Council’ from Paul VI onwards constitute an anomaly that seriously calls into question the legitimacy of their magisterial and governing authority.”
Let us notice the gestures of John Paul II, for example, which violate the first commandment and set a pernicious precedent for believers. He took the mark of the god Shiva – a sign of devotion to the deity – in his forehead from a sacred priestess in India and received a magical wreath. He kissed the Koran, which does not recognize Jesus Christ as the Son of God and commands the killing of Christians as infidels. He paid homage to the grave of Gandhi, the father of the New Age, several times, pronouncing eulogies on him.
John Paul II made an apostate gesture in Assisi. This brought about a spiritual breakthrough and a heretical change in public opinion throughout the Catholic Church. He invited the leaders of pagan demon-worshipping cults and made the churches in Assisi available for them to perform their magical rites and desecrate them. He himself then prayed with them to so-called “our common Father”. But the pagans do not even recognize God the Creator, they pray to demons! He did not preach Christ to them. He did not even give them a word of testimony of our Lord and Saviour! But then he prayed the Our Father with them who knowingly turn to demons and the devil. To whom did he pray with them? To God, or to the devil?
John Paul II established Assisi as a new tradition of so-called interreligious meetings in the spirit of Vatican II. By his gesture he declared that the pagan ways are alternative ways to the way of salvation, linked to the redemptive death of the Son of God on the cross. In doing so, he significantly changed the mindset of Catholics, as if Jesus Christ was no longer the only Saviour.
Throughout his pontificate, he promoted and approved the heresies of modernism and interreligious dialogue as a substitute for mission.
Such a Church and such a papacy are truly instruments of perdition rather than of salvation, as Archbishop Viganò states. Both John Paul II and Francis Bergoglio have only implanted the spirit of Vatican II.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “That is, we must understand that the subversive use of authority in the Church aimed at Her destruction (or at Her transformation into a church other than the one willed and founded by Christ) constitutes in itself a sufficient element to render null and void the authority of this new subject which has maliciously superimposed itself onto the Church of Christ, usurping power. That is why I do not recognize the legitimacy of the Dicastery that is putting me on trial.”
The Archbishop emphasizes that all Catholics must understand the great evil of the subversive use of authority. It is aimed at the Church’s destruction or at Her transformation into something not willed or founded by Christ. In the early years after the Council this was not yet visible, so Catholics in good faith tried to explain everything in positive terms. It was not until the 11 years of Bergoglio’s activities that the hidden goal of the architects of Vatican II was unmasked. Archbishop Viganò concludes that the fact of the abuse of authority aimed to destroy the Church is sufficient to expose the new subject that has superimposed itself onto the Church of Christ. That new subject is the Deep Church, or Bergoglio’s New Age antichurch.
The practical conclusion that follows for bishops and priests is to separate themselves from the invalid Pope who has excluded himself from Christ’s Church and therefore cannot be her head.
Today, any sanction or excommunication issued by the Vatican is null and void. This applies not only to the false excommunication of Archbishop Viganò, but also to every other bishop who stands up for fidelity to Christ and His Church.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “The manner in which the hostile action against the Catholic Church was carried out confirms that it was planned and intended, because otherwise those who denounced it would have been listened to and those who cooperated in it would have immediately stopped.”
Archbishop Viganò, as a long-time Vatican employee, reveals the reality that this was a planned and intended plot against the Church to destroy her from within. He gives as evidence that if this destructive action had not been planned, then those who denounced it would have been listened to by the Church leadership and appropriate measures would have been put in place to stop the internal coup. The reality, however, was that those who pointed out the crimes in the Church and defended orthodox doctrine were removed by the hierarchy. On the other hand, those who advocated the self-destruction of the Church were promoted to the highest offices.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “Certainly, with the eyes of that time and the traditional formation of most of the Cardinals, Bishops, and Clergy, the ‘scandal’ of a Hierarchy that contradicted itself appeared as such an enormity as to induce many prelates and clerics not to believe that it was possible that revolutionary and Masonic principles could find acceptance and promotion in the Church.”
The traditional formation and thinking in the Catholic Church, as the Archbishop expresses it, created such an atmosphere that it was unbelievable that Masonic principles seeking the destruction of the Church would have penetrated into her heart. Therefore they could not even be unmasked. At the very thought that the Catholic hierarchy was fighting against the Church a Catholic would believe this thought to be grave sin. And as for those who held responsible positions, such as bishops and cardinals, respect for authority prevented them from pointing out the crimes that had begun to be committed in the Church against God and against the very foundations on which the Church stands.
Quoting Archbishop C. M. Viganò: “But this was precisely the masterstroke of Satan – as Archbishop Lefebvre called it – who knew how to make use of the natural respect and filial love of Catholics for the sacred authority of the Pastors to induce them to put obedience before the Truth.”
Archbishop Viganò refers to Archbishop Lefebvre, who decades ago pointed out the main cause of opening the door to heresies in the Church. He identified this cause as the masterstroke of Satan, who induced Catholics to put obedience to ecclesiastical authority before the Truth, that is, before the immutable truths of the Faith derived from divine revelation. This preference for obedience to ecclesiastical authority had the effect that the hierarchy could no longer be accused of abusing its authority against the very essence of the Church. If someone pointed this out, such as Archbishop Lefebvre, he had to reckon not with God’s punishment but with ecclesiastical punishment, with so-called excommunication for the alleged crime of disobedience and schism. So the defence of the truths of the faith, or apologia, was practically impossible after the Council! In the euphoria of the Second Vatican Council, before which everyone had to capitulate, heresies had the doors open to all theological schools.

+ Elijah
Patriarch of the Byzantine Catholic Patriarchate

+ Methodius OSBMr + Timothy OSBMr
Secretary Bishops

15 July 2024