11 thoughts on “Michael Matt Explains Himself regarding the Archbishop Vigano Controversy”

  1. Love all the unifying comments

    For Matt to say he had the sense that Vigano’s video was heading down the road of “sedevacantism”, it’s…..turn[ing] one’s head away from the evidence.

    Father Kramer said this about vacant Sees:

    “There are many in the Church who are so petrified about being perceived as “sedevacantists” that they are willing to accept as “pope” an infidel who openly rejects Christ’s teaching as their “pope”; and they seem oblivious of the fact that their “pope” is instituting “reforms” that are more radical than the “reform” of Luther, and by means of these “reforms”, Bergoglio and his followers are defecting from the Catholic Church and forming a counterfeit “Church” based on a Masonic belief system diametrically opposed to the Catholic faith. If they persist in clinging to Bergoglio as their “Holy Father”, they will soon find themselves in an ecumenical “ecclesial community” that has no Mass, no divinely revealed dogmas, and no binding moral code — but it will still claim to be “Catholic” I think my book on Bergoglio says all that needs to be said to prove that Bergoglio is a heretic and an antipope. Soon you will not have to convince anyone that Bergoglio is an antipope. He will prove it himself to the whole world with his “synodal reform” that has already caused the Bergoglian Vatican to defect from the Catholic faith, and to alter the unalterable divine constitution of the Church. He will institute even more radical reforms that will make it obvious to anyone who has the Catholic faith that Bergoglio’s reform is a Reformation like Luther’s “reform”. The Mass will soon be abolished.”

    • This is very true ”“There are many in the Church who are so petrified about being perceived as “sedevacantists”.

      Catholics have been falsely accused of being ”sedvacantists” for many years running, and there is no truth to this accusation. It is used as a weapon toward Catholics by those who use it. It is an ad hominem attack that is used along with ”arm chair theologian”, and so forth.

      The ones who claim to be sedevacantists are those who should be called sedevacantists.
      Faithful Catholics who hold that bergoglio is not the pope are not sedevacantists.

      We believe that bergoglio is an ANTIPOPE by all Catholic standards, and also that POPE BENEDICT XVI remained pope until his death, and we are now in a period of interregnum
      as the Catholic Church has historically been between one valid pope and the next valid pope.

      • So well said…


        From Clement IV to Gregory X:

        The See was vacant from 29 November 1268 until 1 September 1271.

        2 years 10 months

        From Nicholas IV to Celestine V

        The See was vacant from 4 April 1292 until 5 July 1294.

        2 years 3 months

        From Clement V to John XXII

        The See was vacant from 20 April 1314 until 2 August 1316.

        2 years 3 months

        From Gregory XII to Martin V

        The See was vacant from 4 July 1415 until 11 November 1417.

        2 years 5 months

        As the new expression goes, we are interregnumists

      • ‘Faithful Catholics who hold that bergoglio is not the pope are not sedevacantists.’

        If bergoglio is not the pope, then no one is occupying the see. If no one is occupying the see, it is evidently vacant! Must I say that in Latin to be believed?

        Ian Allan
        victim of petty minds,
        former primary scholar who used to write A.M.D.G. on things.

        • Mr. Allan, will you please show me where the term “Sedevacantist” or “Sedevacantism” was used before Vatican II? “Sede vacante” was in existence between Vatican II for sure, but “Sedevacantist” is a term that historically applies to those who hold that all conciliar popes were not popes.

  2. Meanwhile, in other news, the covert attack on the real papacy (not the Bergoglian antipapacy, of course) continues full throttle at One Peter Five.

    Here, we have an article, that attempts a backdoor defense of Bergoglio .by . . .
    attacking Blessed Pius IX, Pope St. Pius X, Vatican 1, and even a jab at St. Robert Bellarmine. These “Big Trad Catholic” or “Trad Inc” outlets cannot be trusted. Keep your eyes peeled, folks. Our enemies are revelaing themselves, and going much much harder now.

    What a horrible week for garbage Trad media.

  3. Father Kramer in his October 2023, Fatima Center-Servants of Jesus and Mary newsletter, Issue number 73, has written the entitled,

    Excerpts as follows-

    ” It is becoming a different religion, a religion of the united nations agenda 2030, and unless Bergoglio is rejected, all of the bishoprics of the faithful bishops of the Catholic Church are going to be usurped. You are going to have imposters in every Episcopal see of the Catholic Church-like you have the usurper who has intruded onto the throne of Peter in Rome.”

    ”People cannot disregard him [bergoglio] by just resisting him in their hearts and their individual lives. He simply must be rejected entirely and publicly, because what he [bergoglio] has been doing for the last ten years is to replace faithful Catholic Cardinals and bishops who represent the true Catholic Faith and the authentic Christian spirit. They are being removed from office, relieved of responsibilities and replaced with blasphemers and heretics like himself. All in accordance with his diabolical plan to institute a different religion, a false church.”

    Why does the leader of the Catholic Identity Conference censor Archbishop Vigano on such an important subject at such a crucial time of Church history when all should be supporting our faithful Catholic bishops and cardinals including Archbishop Vigano as the synod on synodality are intending to finalize their diabolical plot for a false church?

    Compare michael matt’s response as to the censoring of Archbishop Vigano, and ask yourself how and if his response is uniting all the faithful of the TRUE CATHOLIC CHURCH?

  4. In the TRUTH with his own words, michael matt, explains among other reasons that the video of Archbishop Vigano was not used because of ”the content was about a very controversial issue”.

    Archbishop Vigano was censored by michael matt even though michael matt does not like the word censored.

    • michael matt is a weakling who sometimes wants to be considered a strongling. To be fair, he makes a fairly good job of it, but good enough’s not always fair enough.
      I don’t know the content of the video of Archbishop Viganò. Ubi id videre possum?

  5. Very interesting how he says that the whole point of the conference was to “unify” but Canon Law says that the standard of schism itself is the PAPACY; well, then the only logical refutation to Mr. Matt is that unity starts with the Papacy. An open and honest discussion about the the current state of the Papacy since the death of Pope Benedict XVI; nay, since the invalid resignation of Benedict back in 2013. Vigano was absolutely right for wanting to have an “intervention” because the only way we can get back to the standard of unity is to call out the white elephant in the room (Jorge Mario Bergoglio) and that the elephant is an anti pope and not the standard of unity at all. Matt spent a near 9 minutes defending himself and even had the audacity to say it was the devil attacking the conference, when on the contrary, God himself wanted to interrupt through a shepherd willing to speak the truth without compromise. It’s like putting a coronavirus mask on a statue of Our Lady of Fatima. The compliment of being called “team Vigano” is equally as complimentary as being categorized in the Archbishop Marcel camp known as the “rigid Catholics”, thank you very much!


Leave a Comment