Matt GaspersEditor’s Note: In this new interview with CFN’s Matt Gaspers, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò comments on a wide variety of topics including the Francis pontificate after ten years, the 2013 Conclave, Donald Trump’s efforts to obtain a second term as President, the Russia-Ukraine war in light of Our Lady’s Fatima Message, child trafficking and the new film Sound of Freedom, and more. “The failures of the deep church, like those of the deep state, can be hidden and denied, but they are apparent in all of their disastrous consequences,” His Grace says, while emphasizing that in these difficult times we must rely on “the sane (Catholic and Roman) pragmatism which combines the omnipotence of God in deciding the fate of the world with the generous cooperation of man whom He has created and redeemed. In a word, it is the multiplication of the few loaves and fishes.”
INTERVIEW
with Matt Gaspers for “Catholic Family News”
CFN: Your Grace, we are now in the tenth year of Francis’s pontificate. From his comment, “Who am I to judge?” to Amoris Lætitia, from the Abu Dhabi Declaration to the Pachamama incident (and the ongoing Synod on Synodality), we have witnessed truly unprecedented papal scandals over the past decade — scandals touching on both faith and morals. In your opinion, what has been the most damaging affair of this pontificate and how can the Church recover from it?
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: It is difficult — and I think many will agree with me — to identify the single issue that has had the most negative influence out of all of Bergoglio’s actions and words. His every gesture is deliberately provocative and histrionic, deliberately designed to leave the interlocutor baffled, or to offend him, or to make fun of him. Those who think that Bergoglio is naïve are mistaken: his every word is spoken with the purpose of arousing scandal, distancing himself from all his predecessors, and criticizing the Church’s past, falsifying it and misrepresenting it with irritating simplifications. And above all: he never affirms. If you have noticed, his most controversial utterances are not the result of an autonomous statement, but the answer to questions asked by others according to the directions they have received, giving the appearance that the topic has been chosen by the interviewer or interlocutor. It is curious, if you pay attention, that all of his most puzzling statements — from “Who am I to judge” to his latest zinger “God loves you as you are” — are answers to questions. Bergoglio himself confirmed this during the press conference returning from Portugal when he said: “Thank you for the courage to ask this question. Thank you” (here).
In practice, regardless of the topic, all Bergoglio’s words are based a priori on a fiction, a lie. In some cases, these manipulations take place with systems that are more elaborate but always dishonest and disloyal: think of the maneuvers to impose his agenda at the recent Synods and his absolute contempt for the rules. Add to this the mocking contempt with which he attributes to other circumstances and other people what he ostentatiously does first himself.
Beyond all of the individual scandals, I believe that the greatest damage done to the Church by this “pontificate” has been the discredit and dishonor that has been thrown on the Papacy, on the Church, on the clergy, and on the faithful. His hatred for Tradition knows no rest, and this necessarily has repercussions on what is a natural expression of that Tradition: doctrine, morality, liturgy, and spirituality. The demolition is systematic and starts mainly from authority, which is corrupt and subservient to the enemy, abusing its power for the opposite purpose to that which legitimizes it. The democratization of the Church, conciliar “collegiality,” and Bergoglio’s “synodality” are all colossal lies, behind which tyranny hides: the parallel with governments subjected to the globalist elite is evident and confirms a single coordination of the two subversive actions. Both institutions, as we see, are discredited and delegitimized by those who hold positions of authority. In this way, if in the future this crisis should come to an end, restoring trust in the Church and restoring her authority will be almost impossible, humanly speaking.
CFN: In a recent interview (here), you said that certain Cardinals “created by Benedict XVI have proved to be completely inferior to the expectations of faithful conservatives,” and that some of them “at the last Conclave witnessed things that they do not denounce publicly.” What things do you believe they witnessed and why do they not denounce them?
Some cardinals who entered the Conclave in 2013 do not seem to understand the gravity of what happened in the Conclave and continues to happen, under false appearances of formal legality. We have heard them fiercely defend the Papacy, declaring that the errors proposed by Bergoglio and his impromptu provocations are not to be considered papal Magisterium; we heard them ask Bergoglio to resolve the Dubia without him even deigning to answer, and everything ended there. But this denunciation of the effects — that is, the present “pontificate” — is completely useless as long as it refuses to recognize their causes in the conciliar revolution, sidelining this question. Their tetragonal desire to “save” the pseudo-magisterium of Vatican II, which is the remote cause of the present crisis, renders utterly useless any action in defense of the Church.
As for their silence on the events that took place during the Conclave, I see here as well a certain formally legalistic mentality prevailing over the urgent need to put an end to the subversive coup d’état of the deep church. Their main concern is to not undermine the observance of norms that are valid in times of relative normality, so that it cannot be said that they have violated human precepts, while with their respect for procedures they find themselves endorsing the violation of divine precepts carried out by none other than the leaders of the Catholic hierarchy.
I find it incomprehensible that a member of the College of Cardinals can confide to friends that he has witnessed facts that render the election of Jorge Mario null and void, and at the same time he does not want to denounce them publicly so as not to break the Pontifical secret: the secret that he has already broken by talking about it with those who can do nothing, which forces His Eminence into silence before the Church, whose Pastors could perhaps settle the question. But here we are not talking about the Seal of Confession, but rather about matters that have reason to be reserved until this is to the detriment of the institution that brought them into force; otherwise we find ourselves like the Pharisees of the Gospel, who asked Our Lord if it was lawful to pull a donkey out of the well on the Sabbath day.
The indiscretions of these Cardinals focus on the evidence of serious irregularities, without providing further details. I am reminded of what happened in 1958, with the question of the smoke that was initially white and then turned black: it seems that Cardinal Giuseppe Siri was elected, but then, due to the opposition of the Soviet communist regime, the Fathers were forced to elect another man as Pope, who coincidentally turned out to be the conciliatory Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli.
If these confidences are true, I dare not think of the moral travail of those who are preparing to take the secret to the grave, when they would have had the opportunity of unmasking the intrigues and plots of the Saint Gallen Mafia. If they are not true, it would not make sense to talk about it even with the most trusted people (who, however, must have told others, since the news has leaked).
CFN: Humanly speaking, do you foresee any way the next conclave will not repeat the outcome of 2013?
Except for extraordinary interventions by Providence, the College of Cardinals has been largely entirely discredited by Bergoglio: Caligula limited himself to the threat of appointing his horse Incitatus as priest and consul; the present crisis instead creates Cardinals who under Pius IX would have been sent in partibus infidelium. The outcome of the next Conclave therefore seems obvious, rebus sic stantibus. But if evidence were to emerge of some serious irregularity in the 2013 Conclave, this would ipso facto render the outcome of its election null and void, and consequently all the acts of government and magisterium carried out by the one elected. Included among these null and void acts would be, of course, the creation of Cardinals, so that all the Consistories of Bergoglio would be null: we would find ourselves as if by magic back in the situation of 2013, and this would disrupt Bergoglio’s plans, because if the electors of the next Conclave were only those cardinals appointed prior to 2013, they would certainly be less inclined to repeat the mistakes already committed and, strengthened by the experience of the past ten years, they could elect the least bad candidate among them.
CFN: Next year, Americans will face another presidential election. In 2020, you were greatly supportive of Donald Trump’s efforts to obtain a second term. In light of his continued promotion of COVID vaccines and his rhetoric in favor of the LGBTQ agenda, do you believe that Catholics can still support him in another bid for the presidency? Do you still consider him to be a “katechon” of sorts?
The President of the United States of America can be a sort of katechon if he is clear about the global coup d’état perpetrated by the deep state. I believe that Donald Trump has understood the deception he has been subjected to by Antony Fauci and the other Big Pharma peddlers, and that he is also capable — as is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., on the Democrat side — to verify whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus is part of a military project which has used pharmaceutical companies only for the large-scale production of serums (which significantly began even in 2019, before the declaration of the pandemic emergency).
With regard to other forms of more or less explicit support for movements or ideologies contrary to the Catholic Faith, I would like to suggest to the President not to be influenced by the reports and percentages of the electoral communication agencies, and to think about the responsibility before God for the decisions that, as President of the United States, he takes on. The task of the President of the United States is to govern his people for the common good, according to justice and with respect for the natural and divine Law. If he fulfills this task, the Lord — Who is Almighty and Who decides the fate of nations and individuals — will bless him and the American people; if, on the contrary, he fails in his duties and panders to the mentality of the world and the advice of his electoral experts, he can certainly not expect God, offended and disobeyed, to help him and the Nation.
It must be said that Trump, in his recent rallies, has strongly denounced woke policies and pledged to combat gender transition and mutilation for minors, gender indoctrinationin schools, the hyper-sexualization of children, and child trafficking. It is significant that, just when the people’s perception of the very serious threat of the pedophile lobby is increasing, the US Department of Justice has nothing better to do than reduce the level of social alarm: evidently the dome of perverts that maneuvers Biden feels public awareness breathing down their necks.
In any case, I prefer a thousand Trumps to one Biden, there is no doubt about that. Also, because Trump has shown himself in fact much closer to the image of a Catholic politician than the self-styled Catholic Biden has done.
CFN: Do you have any thoughts about Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and his campaign to win the Democratic Party’s nomination for President? Given his support of abortion, could a Catholic vote for Kennedy in good conscience?
Robert Kennedy certainly has a clear view on the pandemic and vaccine fraud and the deep state’s assault on Americans’ fundamental rights. The positive aspects of his political program do not take away the fact that he supports abortion, and this means one cannot vote for him, especially since Kennedy declares himself Catholic despite being in serious contradiction with the teaching of the Church as well as the natural law. Here too we need a jolt of pride, which puts aside electoral calculations and makes a radical choice. Compromise is no longer practicable today.
CFN: Arguably the most significant event since Joe Biden took office has been the outbreak of war between Russia and Ukraine, which seems to have been provoked at least in part by bad actors. What do you think the deep state is hoping to achieve through this ongoing conflict?
The Ukrainian crisis has been prepared for years, in order to destroy the Russian Federation through a process of balkanization, so as to guarantee a hegemony of the Anglosphere in the international geopolitical balance and keep the European nations in a position of subordination with respect to Anglo-American power.
The conflict was supposed to have resulted in Putin’s further rapprochement with Xi Jinping, which was largely predictable and could have been avoided. It is possible that pushing Russia into China’s arms could constitute, in the minds of the New World Order hierarchy, the casus belli for a declaration of war on China itself, which is consistent with the White House’s request to European partners to end the so-called Silk Road trade agreements. This claim will not only have serious repercussions for the reduction of exports to China and for the foreseeable increases in raw materials and semi-finished products from China that until now have been important; it also constitutes the premise for an instability and economic crisis that are usually the antechamber of a military conflict, to the benefit of arms sellers and those who profit from reconstruction (see Iraq, but also Greece). I doubt, however, that the elite has the time necessary to achieve these goals: its days are numbered, because the lie on which their power is based is now exposed.
Beyond the political strategies of one part of the American establishment, we know that the war in Ukraine has also served to hide the scandals of the Biden family and cover up the activity of biolaboratories financed by the Pentagon and America or its allies: artificial viruses genetically modified to be effective on certain ethnic groups have been discovered in those laboratories, in violation of international agreements. Probably the partial failure of the pandemic project — which in 2015 foresaw very large reductions in the world population — is due to the fact that Putin sped up the start of his military operation and put the scientists of those biolaboratories in prison.
Let’s not forget that Ukraine is the main player in the market of surrogacy, organ predation, and human trafficking, which also feeds the pedophile network. The denunciations of humanitarian organizations leave no doubt about these unprecedented horrors: children are being killed and dismembered to send their organs to clinics in the West; wounded Ukrainian soldiers are having their organs harvested for the same purpose; the lives of innocent creatures are being sold to rich perverts to satisfy their abominable deviations. And we know how much the deep stateis composed of characters who can be blackmailed precisely in furtherance of these execrable crimes, a dynamic highlighted by the recent film Sound of Freedom.
CFN: If peace in Ukraine were the true goal, what steps would need to be taken in order to obtain it?
Ukraine acts as a battering ram in NATO’s proxy war against the Russian Federation, so we should first stop considering Zelensky as a legitimate interlocutor in any peace agreements. If he has counted for nothing in the declaration of war and in the continuation of the military actions carried out so far, I do not see what his role should or could be at a peace negotiating table.
Certainly, the Ukrainian crisis can end immediately, if Kiev returns to being a buffer between the NATO bloc — which had previously pledged not to expand to the East — and guarantees the autonomy of Donbass and the independence of Donetsk and Lugansk. The problem is that the damage suffered and the colossal debt taken on by Ukraine in order to cope with the procurement of weapons and the sending of soldiers to the front makes it difficult to end the conflict, also because victory against Russia is impossible without the official involvement of other nations. As long as there was a plan to merely send old tanks or a few volunteers, NATO convinced its member countries to support the war, but I do not believe that they really want to start a world war, despite the ranting statements of some politicians.
CFN: In past statements and interviews, you have expressed notable support for Russia in the context of the war. While Ukraine clearly has the support of Western globalists, would you not agree that Russia’s strong alliance with Communist China is equally concerning, especially in light of Our Lady of Fatima’s prophecies concerning the “errors of Russia”?
My support is not for Russia per se, but for those who are actively opposing the plans of the New World Order at this juncture. It was well known that a conflict between the United States and the Russian Federation would inevitably strengthen the ties of the latter with China: it is only to be hoped that the alliance between Putin and Xi Jinping is not only to the advantage of the Chinese communist dictatorship, and that the balance will be maintained.
I believe, however, that the time has come to get out of the ideological cage that leads us to consider Americans “good” and Russians “bad,” on the basis of a prejudice wanted and imposed by the deep state. As Giulio Andreotti rightly observed — before being ousted from international politics by the intervention of the Atlantic services with the collaboration of organized crime and mafia informants — “NATO should have been dissolved in favor of a social purpose when the Berlin Wall fell in ‘89” (Repubblica, 28 October 2004). Until we realize that Western governments are hostage to an elite dome of subversives who manage power against the peoples, we will not be able to defeat this institutional cancer that alters the international balance and feeds on wars, famine, and poverty.
When Our Lady speaks of the “errors of Russia,” we should consider that these errors have now spread throughout the West, while in Russia materialist atheism and communism have now become a minority. It is in the West — and even within the Catholic Church — that Marxist errors are today publicly professed by governments, in an infernal union between socialism and liberalism that is an expression of the two great Masonic currents, the socialist and revolutionary currents of French Freemasonry and the liberal and institutional currents of Anglo-American Freemasonry.
CFN: One of the hidden plagues in our world today is child trafficking. The new film Sound of Freedom starring Jim Caviezel, the actor who portrayed Our Lord in Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ, shines a light on this plague and calls upon all people to help eradicate it. Meanwhile, Joe Biden’s Department of Justice appears to be downplaying the problem (here). Do you believe, as Caviezel does, that there is a connection between global elites, government agencies, and child trafficking?
As I said earlier, Ukraine is at the center of child trafficking and pedophilia, which principally involves the members of the Satanic elite of the New World Order and government agencies of many states. I am not surprised that this elite seeks in every way to minimize or hide these heinous crimes, also resorting to the power it possesses throughout politics, the media, and the world of entertainment. If we think about how Joe Biden’s son, who has been photographed in poses with minors that are as obscene as they are eloquent, is still at large, we ought to ask ourselves what forces are in play and how deep is the corruption of our leaders and the entire ruling class that revolves around them.
Caviezel’s denunciation has the merit of bringing to light this network of complicity and crimes which cry out for vengeance before God, and which cannot go unpunished. I think also that the now-imminent collapse of the entire deep state will be due more to the indignation of common citizens over the horrors it has perpetrated against children than to the evidence of their plan to exterminate humanity by means of pandemics and famines.
When I hear Klaus Schwab declare: “Climate lockdowns are coming: no more debate necessary,” I wonder how much of a hurry these subversives — Schwab, Gates, Soros, etc. — are in to bring their infernal project to completion in order to hide the reality of what they are doing. Their plans for total control ultimately aim to guarantee themselves impunity by manipulating the Truth and imposing a lie.
CFN: In light of the increasing suppression of the True Mass by the hierarchy, what advice would you give to Catholics who are concerned about attending Mass by, or receiving sacraments from, a priest lacking written faculties or in an “irregular canonical status”?
During the 1970s, when Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre distanced himself from the “conciliar church” and continued to ordain priests who would guarantee the celebration of the Catholic Mass, the first measures taken against the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X were of a canonical nature: suspension a divinis for having conferred Holy Orders in an institute that had become irregular from one day to the next. The same thing that Archbishop Lefebvre had done up until the day before with the encouragement of the Pope had become illicit overnight. It was only fifteen years later, in 1988, with the Consecration of bishops that excommunication was imposed on Lefebvre, which was then revoked by Benedict XVI. Archbishop Lefebvre had the strength to bear witness to his fidelity to Christ even by disobeying the orders of the Hierarchy, and it is thanks to this holy disobedience that the clergy and the faithful have been able to benefit first from the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei and then from Summorum Pontificum.
In fact, I would say more: many of those people who today indulge in giving little lessons about orthodoxy to others, seeking to demonstrate the acceptability of Vatican II, and who attend liturgical celebrations in the Ancient Rite with the tacit agreement that they will not reject the Council — these individuals can do so only thanks to the “intransigence,” that is, to the principled steadfastness, of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who denounced the errors of that most unfortunate assembly and the liturgical reform that followed it. Without his courage; without the testimony of priests who continued to celebrate the Mass of all Ages and who were torn away from the altars only because they were ordered by their Bishops, the traditional rite would have definitively disappeared from our churches, as it did for nearly the first twenty years following the Council.
And so I ask myself: is it possible that the authority of the Church can be used to prevent the very same thing that the authority of the Church blessed and praised prior to the Council? Can the vicarious power of the Pope and Bishops go against the purpose for which Our Lord, the holder of that power, has established the Church? And again: what credibility can the authority of the Shepherds have when it first establishes a universal norm, then prohibits it, then restores it, and then finally de facto suppresses the same rite? It is necessary to recognize that the exercise of ecclesiastical authority is indissolubly tied to the purpose for which Christ has instituted the Sacred Hierarchy, and that no subversive power can usurp this authority without placing itself in opposition to the Church and to Christ Himself. The abolition of the Apostolic Mass by Paul VI in order to replace it with a counterfeit written by heretics was an abuse, and the nullification of Summorum Pontificum by Bergoglio was also an abuse. It is no coincidence that they are both part of a “conciliar church” broken off from the Catholic Church; a self-referential “church” that has separated from Sacred Tradition, with its own “saints,” its own rites, its own doctrine and morality, all in stark contrast to the Saints, Rites, Doctrine and Morality of the Church of Christ.
Anyone who impedes the celebration of the Tridentine Mass does so indefectibly for evil reasons. But in the entire history of the Church no one has ever dared to forbid the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice in a particular form by using the rationale that it does not express a “new ecclesiology.” Because if anyone had ever said this, he would have by those very words been implicitly recognizing that there is a new doctrinal formulation in contrast with that of the Mass of all Ages, something that, for a Catholic, is completely unacceptable and inconceivable.
If, therefore, the Mass of Saint Pius V is heterogeneous with respect to the religion imposed by the “conciliar church,” then it is the “conciliar church” that is placing itself outside the Church, and not those who, changing nothing of what has always been celebrated and believed, wish to defend a rite that has molded and still molds the holiness of the faithful and of priests.
I have personally founded the Exsurge Domine Association (here the link where you can make your donation) in order to help priests and men and women religious who are being persecuted by the Bergoglian junta. We are constructing a monastic village in the Viterbo province in Italy, in order to give a home to the nuns of Pienza who have been persecuted by the Holy See and their Bishop. We are helping priests left without a parish simply because they celebrate the Apostolic Mass, priests who have been removed from ministry solely because they do not accept the present apostasy. I appeal to all Catholics, asking them to contribute to this project.
The failures of the deep church, like those of the deep state, can be hidden and denied, but they are apparent in all of their disastrous consequences. In order to remove the deep church from the ecclesial body — just like amputating an infected limb — it is necessary above all to denounce the false shepherds, firmly resist their illegitimate orders, and coordinate pastoral care for the small communities of those who are “refractory”. This will probably not assure the victory, but our commitment, our sincere desire to serve the Lord and save souls, our testimony of the coherence of our Christian lives, will be able to induce the Lord to that “everything” which only our “nothingness” can move.
And this is, after all, what gives a reason for hope in these circumstances: not the (Orthodox) fatalism of those who await a divine intervention without lifting a finger; not the (Protestant) activism which leaves God’s help out of the picture and places all its hope in itself; but rather the sane (Catholic and Roman) pragmatism which combines the omnipotence of God in deciding the fate of the world with the generous cooperation of man whom He has created and redeemed. In a word, it is the multiplication of the few loaves and fishes.
August 10, 2023
S. Laurentii Martyris
Murray Rundus
