spoiler
An Italian archbishop and staunch critic of Pope Francis has been excommunicated by the Vatican, its doctrinal office has said.
Carlo Maria Vigano was found guilty of schism - meaning he has split from the Catholic Church - after years of fierce disagreement with the pontiff.
The 83-year-old ultra-conservative has previously called on the Pope to resign, accusing him of heresy and criticising his stances on immigration, climate change and same-sex couples.
Archbishop Vigano was a senior figure in the Church, serving as papal envoy to Washington from 2011 to 2016.
In 2018 he went into hiding after alleging that the Pope had known about sexual abuse by an American cardinal and failed to act. The Vatican rejected the accusation.
Over time, the archbishop became associated with US conspiracy theorists, criticising Covid vaccines and alleging a “globalist” and “anti-Christian” project by the UN and other groups - both familiar conspiratorial themes.
On Friday the Vatican’s doctrinal office said his refusal to submit to Pope Francis was clear from his public statements.
“The Most Reverend Carlo Maria Vigano was found guilty of the reserved delict [violation of the law] of schism,” the statement said, adding that he had been excommunicated - or banished from the church.
Responding by a post on X, the archbishop linked to the decree that was emailed to him and said:
“What was attributed to me as guilt for my conviction is now put on record, confirming the Catholic Faith that I fully profess.”
Archbishop Vigano was charged with schism and denying the pope’s legitimacy last month. At the time, he write on X that he regarded the accusations against him as “an honour”.
“I repudiate, reject, and condemn the scandals, errors, and heresies of Jorge Mario Bergoglio,” he said, using Argentine Pope’s given name.
Pope Francis has put himself at odds with traditionalist Catholics by making overtures towards the LGBTQ+ community, championing migrant rights and condemning the excesses of capitalism.
Last year, he took action against another ultra-conservative critic, dismissing Bishop Joseph E Strickland of Texas when he refused to resign after an investigation.
Yet another proof that catholics (and, I’d argue, representatives of religious organisations in general) have no principles. Can never actually follow their own religion when it doesn’t suit them.
Being a queer person raised in a strict Catholic household taught me that this is pretty damn true. I’d get all sorts of inconsistencies and mental gymnastics when it came to their homophobia and transphobia. For instance, people like my devout-ass grandparents would say “Lying is a sin, and you’ll go to hell if you do it,” but there were times where they literally lied to me about such matters. My grandparents said “We’re not going to talk about LGBTQ-related subjects because it causes too much strife” when I was in their household, but simultaneously, they tried to bring it back up! They got upset when I told them that I’d rather not talk about it due to the inevitable conflict, and they got doubly upset when I said “Didn’t you say this subject was now off-limits?”
But isn’t this equally good evidence that Catholics as a whole do have principles that they’re willing to kick high ranking people out over?
If a Communist party kicked a high ranking member out because they were an anti-vaxxer, would that mean communists have no principles?
Edit: I’m not defending the Church, I don’t really care for them. Just want to understand the principle here.
Being a catholic means that you recognise the infallibility of the pope.
Being a communist does not imply that you think that general secretaries and the like are infallible.
EDIT: And yes, I am saying that if you want to be a catholic (in particular, but I also have a more general claim), if you want to be principled, and if you want to not be a shithead, you have to choose up to two of those things.
Isn’t the pope only truly infallible when he’s speaking ex cathedra? Idk if excommunications are made ex-cathedra but I feel like every organization needs a way of fully and finally expelling members from itself who don’t align with its beliefs or mission.
I fully get that the current pope is simply less bad than the usual popes and that the next guy could be an absolute monster. I just don’t think that expelling a guy for being an anti-vaxx conspiracy theorist is a good example of the Catholic church being bad.
What non-ex cathedra stuff did the archbishop criticise the pope for?
Meaning that, in a decent organisation, there shouldn’t be rules that give the leadership a carte blanche to do basically whatever they want or make you promise to claim that said leadership is infallible.
I’m not saying that the church expelling him is a bad thing. I am saying that the archbishop’s actions were an example of catholics being unprincipled whenever it suits them.
However, I am also saying that no principled catholic can be a good person on account of upholding the authority of a pedophilic church that has done a plethora of bad things.
If belief in the pope’s infallibility is a requirement for being Catholic then the excommunicated dude didn’t really want to be a Catholic and now he’s not a Catholic. Problem resolved, I don’t see what the issue is.
Dude was an archbishop who lost his job because he thought the pope was being too nice to LGBT people and immigrants. Good riddance, he can fuck off and find a real job. Today is the day the broken catholic clock gets to be right.
Then why was he a part of the church? Why was he a bishop?
Why didn’t the followers of the supposedly-unchanging god excommunicate people of the same beliefs about migrants and LGBT people previously? Or is their god dancing to the whims of the pope?
I can agree to that.
They didn’t kicked him because he’s antivaxxer, they kicked him because he badmouthed the pope. Church is choke full of reactionary antivaxx bigots, but they sit on their golden chairs at ease as long as money flows.
Removed by mod
I take it you didn’t read the rest of what I said. Here it is for you:
But hey, considering that you want to stan for the church known for its pedophilia (among other things), do enlighten me how a person can be both a principled catholic (i.e. upholding the authority of said church, among other things) and not support stuff like pedophilia, queerphobia, racism, etc.
EDIT: just in case, I’m going to reiterate what I said: the archbishop is yet another example of catholics reneging on their religious ideology when it is inconvenient for them, despite claiming that there is some supernatural support for said ideology and that not adhering to it is bad and, depending on the details, can be punished in a very cartoonishly overreacting manner.
And no, I’m not claiming that the archbishop is not a shithead on the grounds of him being unprincipled.
EDIT2: and yes, the catholic church does have principles. They include defence of sexual assault, including pedophilia, support for genocides, support for the German nazis in particular and nazis in general, fearmongering about LGBT people, support for slavery, support for colonialism, invention of reasons for why it is okay to kill Muslims, and so on.
Removed by mod
Cute way of admitting to first misreading what I said and proceeding to defend a horrible entity.
It’s ‘nice’ to see you double down on your defence of the actual actions of a centuries-old pedophilic cult on account that you can pick and choose what rhetoric you like. Sure sounds like you claim that the popes’ teachings are not infallible.
So I get to tell everybody how trans and gay people are an affront to nature? So that I get to tell non-white people how they should all be subservient to white people, up to and including as chattel slaves? So that I get to support the Holocaust and then help German nazis avoid facing justice? So that I tell women how they are lesser people than men? So that I get to engage in SA on minors?
I think I’ll pass on every god that supports that.