religions
5512
50:46
Archibishop Carlo Maria Viganò Is the Pope catholic ? To Prof. Edmund Mazza On Line Conference
Carol H
petrus100452 - You have your thinking the wrong way round. Archbishop Lefevbre did not cause schism and fragmentation; the liberals of Vatican II did. His Grace merely held on to what had always been taught -and with a spirit of obedience to the Holy father as far as he could go without compromising the Eternal Faith. Ask yourself - what would you have done? As the liberals were waving their victory …More
petrus100452 - You have your thinking the wrong way round. Archbishop Lefevbre did not cause schism and fragmentation; the liberals of Vatican II did. His Grace merely held on to what had always been taught -and with a spirit of obedience to the Holy father as far as he could go without compromising the Eternal Faith. Ask yourself - what would you have done? As the liberals were waving their victory flags and the churches worldwide were tearing down their altars, what would you have done as a Bishop of Christ? Prayed with great faith for an intervention? Prayed that God would somehow send a divine solution?

You bring to mind that meme where the man is sitting trapped on his roof amist flood waters and each time someone offers to rescue him, he replies, 'no, I'm waiting for God to rescue me.'

God did send a divine solution, and that saintly man of Econe sparked a traditional movement that has kept the Church afloat despite the raging storm that threatens to destroy it. Just as Christ promised.

And yes, this is something that Archbishop Vigano himself has failed to grasp: the Church and the Papacy are one - and if God has promised that the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church then we can be assured that they will not prevail against the Papacy either. Thus to speak of the Pope not being the Pope is mere Panic talking. God IS helping us - in that we must trust.
petrus100452
@Carol H Bishop Lefevbre did not adhere to what had always been taught by the Church, namely that a bishop may not consecrate a bishop without the permission of the pope. That is what Msgr. Lefevbre did and as a result he automatically incurred excommunication. I remember vividly the day it happened and what deep suffering this was for John Paul II. What I would have done? I would have embraced (…More
@Carol H Bishop Lefevbre did not adhere to what had always been taught by the Church, namely that a bishop may not consecrate a bishop without the permission of the pope. That is what Msgr. Lefevbre did and as a result he automatically incurred excommunication. I remember vividly the day it happened and what deep suffering this was for John Paul II. What I would have done? I would have embraced (with God's grace) the cross of the Church, firmly trusting that the promise of Jesus is true and that the gates of hell will not overwhelm the Church. No matter how sinful we (the Church) are. The self-justification of schismatics is always the "wickedness" or "errors" of the pope and church hierarchy. It is their justification for founding a "holy" and "orthodox" church. It always turns out to be an illusion.
Carol H
His Grace Archbishop Lefevbve did not found a new church; he defended The Church. And while I understand the deep suffering His Holiness John Paul II felt, I also understand the deep suffering His Grace - and thousands of Catholics - felt being betrayed by their own hierachy. We must keep in mind that not even a Pope has the right or the authority to stop you practising fundamentals that have been …More
His Grace Archbishop Lefevbve did not found a new church; he defended The Church. And while I understand the deep suffering His Holiness John Paul II felt, I also understand the deep suffering His Grace - and thousands of Catholics - felt being betrayed by their own hierachy. We must keep in mind that not even a Pope has the right or the authority to stop you practising fundamentals that have been part of the faith since the early days of the Church. The betrayal - even if not intentional - was on the Holy Father's side. And this brings us to the core of the argument - to commit a schismatic act, one must, in some shape or form, have revolted against a law of the Church. His Grace did not and has never done so. He merely consecrated four bishops (which the Holy Father had tentatively given permission for) without formal permission for the actual individuals involved. Yes, he ultimately disobeyed Rome but he did so in defence of Rome who were unwittingly working against themselves. And the fruits speak for themselves. This is no illusion - this is the very blood that feeds the body and keeps it alive. God raised up Archbishop Lefebrve, not to start a new church, but to throw himself at the feet of the Holy Father in order to stop him from stepping off the cliff edge as the liberals wanted.
123jussi
No the pope is not catholic but unfortunately he is the pope!
petrus100452
One can ask whether the pope is catholic, but on very good grounds one can also ask whether Archbishop Vigano is catholic. He is undoubtedly a good speaker and a very intelligent man, but he rejects fundamental elements of the catholic faith, such as the acceptance of the legitimate pope (however flawed this pope may be) and the complete rejection of the Second Vatican Council. This leads to further …More
One can ask whether the pope is catholic, but on very good grounds one can also ask whether Archbishop Vigano is catholic. He is undoubtedly a good speaker and a very intelligent man, but he rejects fundamental elements of the catholic faith, such as the acceptance of the legitimate pope (however flawed this pope may be) and the complete rejection of the Second Vatican Council. This leads to further schism and fragmentation, as happened earlier with another schismatic bishop, Bishop Lefevbre (whom Bishop Vigano considers a "saint"). Jesus remains faithful to His "unfaithful" Church and we must do the same and not invent escape routes (which, despite their high religious motivation are nothing but a human solution to the crisis of the Church)