If anyone didn't have time to read Archbishop Vigano's most recent letter, or if you had trouble understanding what he was saying, here is a diagram that may help explain it.
Back in June, Viganò wrote an open letter to Trump, which Trump later tweeted out. It was filled with conspiracy theories and QAnon imagery. @rightscholar broke it all down here.
Later that month we discussed this emerging conspiratorial extremism on the fringes (but seeping more and more into the minds of everyday Catholics) of the Catholic Church in the @PetersFieldHosp podcast.
When Viganò's missives began appearing with greater frequency and he became a hero to the Maga wing of the US Church, and as Trump began to exploit this group for campaign purposes, @rightscholar wrote an update in July for @Where_Peter_is.
Journalist @BfragaReporter wrote a lengthy but necessary analysis of the radical traditionalist wing of the Church back in August, and describes the form it has taken in response to these times.
More recently, @rightscholar dug into the long history of conspiracy theories similar to QAnon for @Where_Peter_is, and traced the roots of this type of phenomenon, including the 80s "satanic panic" & all the way back to anti-semitism in the middle ages.
For some background into the statements of Archbishop Viganò, and where he stands in relation to the Catholic Church and Pope Francis, check out this analysis by @FastiggiR in @Where_Peter_is (answer to the question: yes).
"Covid and Biden are two holograms, two artificial creations, ready to be adapted time and time again to contingent needs or respectively replaced when necessary with Covid-21 and Kamala Harris."
Yes, and...?
'the contemptuous comments responding to my words about the “children of Light” and the “children of darkness,” as if my “apocalyptic tones” were the fruit of a ravingly mad mind and not the simple observation of reality.'
"fraud that they have plotted against President Trump and against America will not remain standing for long, nor will the worldwide fraud of Covid, the responsibility of the Chinese dictatorship, the complicity of the corrupt and traitors, and the enslavement of the deep church."
I'm 89% certain that Mr Davis of @CrisisMag (1) didn't read the Vanity Fair article closely, & (2) is clueless about the contributors to @Where_Peter_is, many of whom also have big families, homeschool, and attend the EF, BUT happen to be in full communion with the pope as well.
This part where he mentions @rightscholar killed me though:
In other words, "The forces of evil have propped up three of the most important figures in the nation's capital: the President-Elect, the Speaker of the House, and the Cardinal Archbishop of Washington, DC... plus this guy Dave from Ontario who blogs in his spare time."
The reactionary, anti-Francis movement that is poisoning the Catholic Church is divorced from reality, history, human decency, common sense, cultural progress, civil rights, the common good, and God's will.
"any sober and dispassionate mind must conclude that giving ladies the right to vote was the single greatest catastrophe in the history of our storied republic."
Oh it gets worse:
"Does anyone—conservative or progressive—believe that our laws have become more sound, and our government more useful, over the last one hundred years? If not, we should do one really sound and sensible thing: take away women’s right to vote."
In 2020, Anti-Francis Catholics are moving away from administrative/ecclesial attempts to take him down (trying to depose him or force him to resign), and have become much more apocalyptic, paranoid, and conspiracy-minded. 1/
Beginning in 2016 with the dubia, the main tactic appeared to be to try and rally members of the hierarchy to formally accuse Francis of heresy - presumably with the ultimate goal of declaring him to have forfeited the papacy. That clearly had few takers and failed miserably. 2/
In 2018, the most damaging attack on Francis was Viganò's "testimony," an attempt to embroil him in scandal and force him to resign. This was effective because it exploited a real issue that rightly concerns many. But upon investigation, Viganò's claims were discredited. 3/
"Gänswein claims he only learned about the whole project once it was too late. ... 'Previously, when Benedict wanted to publish something, he always got the pope’s approval...In this case, that did not happen.' ”
"Gänswein says the publisher never offered Benedict a writer’s contract. In the end, the ex-pope saw his name affixed to chapters that could be interpreted as an open affront to the leadership of" Francis.
Oof. And @IgnatiusPress says they fulfilled their "moral obligations"?
Sure, this wasn't planned as an ambush on Francis:
The German "publishing house had to sign a non-disclosure agreement just before Christmas without even knowing what the project would be about."