When you consider that Bergoglio's best friend Gustavo Vera was accused by two people of sex trafficking children and that one witness was murdered two weeks before she could testify I'd say it sounds legit. The other person claims that Gustavo was supplying children to elites in Rome and also that Bergoglio was one of his principal funders.
I 100% concur that Archbishop Vigano needs actual evidence this occurred vs. just someone’s words. With that being said, covering up and ignoring crimes committed by prelates and priests who are doing the same thing is just as evil and probably more so, and is unworthy of the Supreme Pontiff. Rupnik, McCarrick, etc. For prelates and priests who are known homosexuals, heretics, and deny the Catholic teachings and are allowed to profess these things in the open with the Supreme Pontiff being silent or concurring with them is a grave evil. The various documents that have been put out that go against Catholicism and are gravely evil (promoting homosexuality and other perverse relationships, bodily mutilation, allowing people engaging in these evils to serve as Godparents, etc.) all of these things have been done with the Supreme Pontiff’s approval, and or by his command. This evil lies at his feet. All of this leads to pedophila and abuse amongst the clergy. Yes, the allegations made against Pope Francis were grave & evidence is required, however he has a plethora of grave, depraved evil that he has promoted, advocated for, and done already regarding the Church and the faithful!
@@jefffinkbonner9551 How do you do that with criminals without risking your life? Many of the clergy has been eliminated once they begin bringing forth evidence. Pope John Paul I was eliminated because he intended to remove masonic cardinals and bishops asap.
Murray took a lot of heat when he started out here. People were upset to have gaspers go to the background. Murray’s only problem is some neoconservative talking points. Generally he is very based and very intelligent
This accusation, this crime, if true, would still be eclipsed by the other crimes directly against the Faith that we know without a doubt Bergoglio has committed. Idolatry coming to mind immediately.
It's been evident for years now that Lefebvre was a thousand times more prudent than Viganò. He never called the pope by his baptismal name for example, and certainly never accused the pope of something he was unable to prove.
@@skilo581 calling the Pope by his baptismal name is a European thing that has been done for ages. Read Lefebvre - An Open Letter To Confused Catholics It’s 80 pages and he explains everything In the end he even questions the validity of the N.O. Mass
Our dear Archbishop Lefebvre was forced on many occasions to make public complaints about the popes and bishops. Needs must. And in fairness to Archbishop Vigano, times are much clearer for us all than they were and the enemy has no qualms about being in our faces with all their dirt. Who knows what Archbishop Lefebvre would have done or said now?
@@PraytheRosaryEveryDay his complaints were always about public sins, never private ones. He would never have wanted to heedlessly scandalize the faithful.
Well, I saw the video Mr. Marshall did regarding these wild claims Archbishop Viganó has made against the Vicar of Christ. And if Mr. Marshall is pulling away from Archbishop Viganó…then it’s probably not going to go well for the Archbishop in being able to provid those receipts. Archbishop Viganó is probably thinking to himself - ‘Well, if His Holiness has allowed the likes of Cardinal McCarrick and Fr. Rupnik to get away with the things they’ve gotten away with; then the worst I’ll get is a gentle slap on the wrist as well.” And Archbishop Viganó will continue to loathe the Supreme Pontiff because of it. Archbishop Viganó sees His Holiness as being a pushover. He’ll continue to disrespect and disobey the Successor of St. Peter. Archbishop Viganó doesn’t understand the Mercy of the Bishop or Rome or the Mercy of Our Lord.
What do you think about Archbishop Vigano's accusation?
Wouldn't surprise me
When you consider that Bergoglio's best friend Gustavo Vera was accused by two people of sex trafficking children and that one witness was murdered two weeks before she could testify I'd say it sounds legit. The other person claims that Gustavo was supplying children to elites in Rome and also that Bergoglio was one of his principal funders.
I 100% concur that Archbishop Vigano needs actual evidence this occurred vs. just someone’s words. With that being said, covering up and ignoring crimes committed by prelates and priests who are doing the same thing is just as evil and probably more so, and is unworthy of the Supreme Pontiff. Rupnik, McCarrick, etc. For prelates and priests who are known homosexuals, heretics, and deny the Catholic teachings and are allowed to profess these things in the open with the Supreme Pontiff being silent or concurring with them is a grave evil. The various documents that have been put out that go against Catholicism and are gravely evil (promoting homosexuality and other perverse relationships, bodily mutilation, allowing people engaging in these evils to serve as Godparents, etc.) all of these things have been done with the Supreme Pontiff’s approval, and or by his command. This evil lies at his feet. All of this leads to pedophila and abuse amongst the clergy.
Yes, the allegations made against Pope Francis were grave & evidence is required, however he has a plethora of grave, depraved evil that he has promoted, advocated for, and done already regarding the Church and the faithful!
The Archbishop plays it safe to preserve his life as he knows what these people are like.
Well, he's definitely not an idiot. The good Archbishop is a saintly man. The evidence will certainly emerge.
The impetus is on him to present the evidence and show the receipts.
@@jefffinkbonner9551 How do you do that with criminals without risking your life? Many of the clergy has been eliminated once they begin bringing forth evidence. Pope John Paul I was eliminated because he intended to remove masonic cardinals and bishops asap.
Vigano stole money from his brother.
It's very grave if true but he didn't give any proof.
Vigano will come thru
Mr. Rundus is impressive. Actually CFN greatly impresses me.
Murray took a lot of heat when he started out here. People were upset to have gaspers go to the background. Murray’s only problem is some neoconservative talking points. Generally he is very based and very intelligent
This accusation, this crime, if true, would still be eclipsed by the other crimes directly against the Faith that we know without a doubt Bergoglio has committed. Idolatry coming to mind immediately.
The Fiducia Suplicans edict 12/18/23 is the cause for many debacles in the RCC.
Could this accusation come from someone other than AB Vigano?
The main reason for all these NovusOrdo RCC problems is LACK OF SERIOUS BIBLE STUDY in many RCC SEMINARIES AND PARISHES
My first thought was, archbishop LeFebvre would never have gone about the accusation of a superior, especially a pope, in this way.
Lefebvre never had to deal with the apostate usurper known as Bergoglio.
It's been evident for years now that Lefebvre was a thousand times more prudent than Viganò. He never called the pope by his baptismal name for example, and certainly never accused the pope of something he was unable to prove.
@@skilo581 calling the Pope by his baptismal name is a European thing that has been done for ages.
Read Lefebvre - An Open Letter To Confused Catholics
It’s 80 pages and he explains everything
In the end he even questions the validity of the N.O. Mass
Our dear Archbishop Lefebvre was forced on many occasions to make public complaints about the popes and bishops. Needs must. And in fairness to Archbishop Vigano, times are much clearer for us all than they were and the enemy has no qualms about being in our faces with all their dirt. Who knows what Archbishop Lefebvre would have done or said now?
@@PraytheRosaryEveryDay his complaints were always about public sins, never private ones. He would never have wanted to heedlessly scandalize the faithful.
Says the guy wearing a baby blue bow tie. ...k...
True
Is it true that Vigano' is not anymore in the Catholic Church but he's in another christian church?
No.
@@alecfoster4413wasn't he a follower of Lefebvre ? I read something at the newdailycompass website.
Indeed, ‘No’; it’s not a Christian Church he is in now. It’s a heretical one.
Feels shark-jumpy, sad to say
Well, I saw the video Mr. Marshall did regarding these wild claims Archbishop Viganó has made against the Vicar of Christ.
And if Mr. Marshall is pulling away from Archbishop Viganó…then it’s probably not going to go well for the Archbishop in being able to provid those receipts.
Archbishop Viganó is probably thinking to himself - ‘Well, if His Holiness has allowed the likes of Cardinal McCarrick and Fr. Rupnik to get away with the things they’ve gotten away with; then the worst I’ll get is a gentle slap on the wrist as well.”
And Archbishop Viganó will continue to loathe the Supreme Pontiff because of it. Archbishop Viganó sees His Holiness as being a pushover. He’ll continue to disrespect and disobey the Successor of St. Peter. Archbishop Viganó doesn’t understand the Mercy of the Bishop or Rome or the Mercy of Our Lord.
Way to gossip Vigano