The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF/DDF) before Vatican Council II, interpreted the Athanasius , Nicene and Apostles Creed rationally and so traditionally. This is not being done today by the DDF. So doctrine and faith is different.

 

JULY 9, 2024

The DDF was not eligible to conduct the Vigano trial since unlike the CDF of pre Vatican Council II times, it does not interpret the Creeds rationally and so traditionally. It is in heresy and schism like the mainline Catholic Church

 

DICASTERIUM PRO DOCTRINA FIDEI

Prot. No. 194/2024

H.E. Archbishop Carlo Maria VIGANO titular archbishop of Ulpiana

Extrajudicial criminal process ex can. 1720 CIC coram Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith

Can. 1364 CIC, art. 2 SST

CRIMINAL DECREE

PREMISE

1.     H.E. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò was born in Varese on January 16, 1941, was ordained priest on March 24, 1968 for the Diocese of Pavia and consecrated bishop by Pope St. John Paul II on April 26, 1992. He has held the following positions: Apostolic Nuncio to Nigeria, Delegate for Papal Representations, Secretary General of the Governorate of Vatican City State, Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America.

2.     The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, taking into account the public statements of H.E. Archbishop Viganò, traceable on the web (statements published in writing and video recordings), from which it appears that he rejects submission to the Supreme Pontiff, communion with the members of the Church subject to him, and the legitimacy and magisterial authority of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, in a letter dated March 25, 2024, sent to the prelate via e-mail ([the mailing address of] Archbishop Viganò is unknown), invited him to the headquarters of the Dicastery “to deepen his positions.” The Prelate was also informed that “such an interview could also take place with the presence of a person he trusts, should he deem it more appropriate.” The Prelate was also asked to indicate his domicile, to which the original of the letter could be forwarded.

3.     H.E. Archbishop Viganò did not give any reply to the Dicastery.

4.     Subsequently, the Congress of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith of May 10, 2024, having regard to the mandate in art. 1 § 2 SST and considering the prior investigation superfluous (can. 1717 § 1 CIC),

decided to initiate an extrajudicial criminal trial against the prelate, celebrated coram the same Dicastery.

5.                By the Decree of June 3, 2024, the trial instructor, assessors and notary public were appointed in accordance with the law….

 

 

11.           Norms on crimes reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith:

a. art. 1: “§ 1 The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in accordance with art. 52 of the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, judges, pursuant to art. 2 § 2, crimes against the faith, as well as more serious crimes committed against morals or in the celebration of the sacraments and, if necessary, proceeds to declare or impose canonical sanctions in accordance with the law, whether common or proper, without prejudice to the competence of the Apostolic Penitentiary and without prejudice to the Agendi ratio in doctrinarum examine. § 2. In the crimes referred to in § 1, subject to the mandate of the Roman Pontiff, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has the right to judge the Cardinal Fathers, Patriarchs, Legates of the Apostolic See, Bishops, as well as other individuals referred to in can. 1405 § 3 of the Code of Canon Law (CIC) and can. 1061 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches (CCEO).”

b. art. 2: “§ 1. The crimes against the faith, referred to in art. 1, are heresy, apostasy and schism, in accordance with canons 751 and 1364 CIC and canons 1436 and 1437 CCEO. § 2. In the cases mentioned in § 1 it is the duty of the Ordinary or Hierarch, according to law, to conduct the judicial process in the first instance or extrajudicial by decree, without prejudice to the right of appeal or recourse to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. § 3. In the cases referred to in § 1 it is the responsibility of the Ordinary or the Hierarch, in accordance with the law, to remit to the external forum, respectively, the excommunication latae sententiae or the major excommunication;…

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in accordance with art. 52 of the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, judges, pursuant to art. 2 § 2, crimes against the faith...

The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican was not eligible to conduct the Vigano trial.Since the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF/DDF) before Vatican Council II,  interpreted the Athanasius , Nicene and Apostles Creed rationally and so traditionally. This is not being done today by the DDF. So doctrine and faith is different. There is a New Theology based upon the objective mistake in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office(CDF/DDF). The mistake was repeated in 1965 by the CDF.

The DDF  did not correct the mistake in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office (CDF/DDF) to the Archbishop of Boston relative to Fr. Leonard Feeney. It confused invisible cases of the baptism of desire as being visible exceptions for the traditional strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), defined by three Church Councils.

Then the CDF, now DDF, did not correct the mistake in 1965 when Pope Paul VI and Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, pro-prefect of the CDF, confused LG 8,14,15,16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, as being visible exceptions for the dogma EENS and the past ecclesiocentrism. They would have to be visible, since invisible people cannot be exceptions for EENS.

Fr. Hans Kung sj, Fr. Karl Rahner sj and Fr. Joseph Ratzinger interpreted the baptism of desire (LG 14), for example, irrationally and even today there is no comment from the DDF.

So the DDF is in first class heresy on the Creeds and are in a break with the Magisterium over the centuries. They can no more claim that Vatican Council II is a break with Tradition, since now we know we can interpret the Council rationally and there is only the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition.

Even today, after so many reports, after the Vigano trial and excommunication,  Cardinal Fernandez and Msgr. John Kennedy do not deny that they have used a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II to create a break with tradition.  as it was held by the CDF over the centuries.

So when the DDF does not affirm traditional Catholic faith and morals and cannot affirm the Catholic faith in public, how can it judge Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano?

Now the DDF wants Archbishop Vigano to accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. This was the irrational interpretation of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect of the CDF and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj. Prefect of the CDF.

1.The DDF wants Archbishop Vigano to accept Vatican Council II with  new doctrines created by the false premise. He has refused. They excommunicated him.

2.Cardinal Ratzinger wanted Archbishop Lefebvre to accept Vatican Council II interpreted irrationally. He refused. They excommunicated him

3.Fr. Leonard Feeney was expected to affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus with visible exceptions of the baptism of desire. He refused. They excommunicated him.

So it is the mainline Catholic Church which remains in heresy and schism which is now being enforced upon Archbishop Vigano. - Lionel Andrades