Archbishop Viganò: Spadaro’s blasphemous article a manifestation of the ‘counter-church’ and its false dogmas
Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
Spadaro’s article is not a simple provocation – something already unheard of in itself – but the manifestation, the epiphany, as some 'theologian' of Santa Marta would call it, of a counter-church with its false dogmas, mendacious precepts, deceitful preaching, its corrupted and corrupting ministers. (lifesitenews.com)
Spadaro’s words are like a puddle of sewage containing the scum of the worst Modernism that has been plaguing the Church for more than a century. It is the Modernism that was never definitively eradicated from seminaries and self-styled Catholic universities, to which a sect of heretics and those who are misguided has erected the totem of the Second Vatican Council in place of two thousand years of Tradition. Until some time ago this “synthesis of all heresies” tried to make itself presentable by failing to manifest its antichristic nature, which was nonetheless consubstantial with it: there was still the risk that some vaguely conservative Prelate not yet fully committed to the cause would realize its intrinsic danger.
Of course, the divinity of Christ was considered to be merely wishful thinking flowing from the need for the sacred of the “primitive community.” His miracles were downplayed to exaggerations, His words to metaphors; on the other hand, “There were no recorders,” said Arturo Sosa, Superior General of the Society of Satan. Today, protected by a Jesuit who in violation of the Rule of Saint Ignatius occupies the See of Peter, the worst followers of this sect feel free to give vent to their rantings and arrive, in an infernal delirium, at the point of blaspheming Jesus Christ, who has already been the subject of disturbing epithets from Bergoglio. “Jesus became a snake, he became a devil,” the Argentine said some time ago. He is echoed by Spadaro, who with the arrogance of one who believes himself unpunished dares to define Our Lord as “a sick person, a prisoner of the rigidity and the dominant theological, political and cultural elements of his time”; “indifferent to suffering, angry and insensitive; unbreakably hard; an unmerciful theologian; mocking and disrespectful; blinded by nationalism and theological rigorism.” It is useless to explain to these entangled minds what the Holy Fathers have taught about the Gospel passage about the Canaanite woman: they are interested in keeping the idol of Vatican II high on its pedestal; and it matters little to them if in order to defend their errors they have to trample on the Son of God, offending and blaspheming Him as not even the worst heresiarchs of the past had dared to do.
