1. Your Excellency, the first question is perhaps the most difficult. Do you still consider yourself a member of the Catholic Church?
I consider myself a full member of the Catholic Church, as Bishop and Successor of the Apostles. Schismatic is anyone who does not recognize the Authority of the Roman Pontiff: I have never failed in my Profession of the Catholic Faith, much less with regard to the Petrine Primacy.
I was convicted and declared guilty of the canonical crime of schism and punished by excommunication for a non-crime by an illegitimate tribunal, on the mandate of an illegitimate “pope.”
What I condemn of the Second Vatican Council, has been already condemned by the popes preceding the conciliar revolution. The usurpation of the Throne by Bergoglio, which I have denounced, would be considered in the same way by all of them. It is the conciliar church, today renamed synodal and Bergoglian, which rejects the perennial Magisterium of the Pontiffs and thus places itself outside the Catholic Church.
We have witnessed a regime change, prepared since Vatican II, intended to strike at the heart of the Papacy and therefore the divine constitution of the Church that Christ founded on Peter. It is the Revolution 2.0: after eliminating the figure of the Catholic King, Freemasonry had to bring down the figure of the Pope, the Vicar of Christ on earth. In both cases, the true target of this satanic hatred is always Our Lord, in His dual role as King of the Nations and Pontiff of the Church.
Using a supernatural gaze, we are able to understand how much Satan enjoys seeing the Church humiliated by its own Ministers, in having good Pastors condemned for the “crime” of not denying the Catholic Faith. This terrible trial is foretold in the Scriptures: the Church, the Mystical Body, must follow her Head even in His Passion, so that She may then triumph over death as He did. The passio Ecclesiæ consists in facing, as an ecclesial body, injustices, slanders, mock trials, torments, and an ignominious condemnation by a new Sanhedrin that is just as corrupt, unfaithful, and illegitimate as the one that condemned Our Lord. But the Cross is the Royal Road to the glory of the Resurrection, and this is an ontological reality that no ideology can even minimally undermine.
2. What do you expect from this upcoming conclave?
The Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis that regulates the Conclave, confirmed by the Motu Proprio of Benedict XVI Normas Nonnullas, peremptorily establishes that the number of Cardinal electors must not exceed 120 individuals. But the Cardinal electors who make up the imminent “conclave” are 136: we are therefore faced with a very serious violation that alone would be enough to undermine the legitimacy of any supposedly valid Conclave.
Furthermore, a College of Cardinals composed of 108 “cardinals” created by a Jesuit who usurped the Papacy for twelve years cannot validly elect a legitimate pope. At most, the College will be able to designate its own representative, someone who will renew and continue the usurpation of the recently deceased predecessor, and see the ongoing fraud further ratified by a complicit or cowardly episcopate.
The Bergoglian experiment has, however, made evident that there is a rift separating the faithful and many good priests from the Hierarchy, a rift that mirrors the one existing in the civil sphere between citizens and their rulers. In both cases, authority has shown itself in its true self-referential and tyrannical nature, and this will perhaps lead to a slowing down of the race towards the abyss, with the election of a moderately conservative “pope.” If this happens, the idea will be that it could be effective to administer a palliative cure to contain the devastating effects of the disease that strikes the Catholic Church, rather than a radical treatment that removes its causes. But such a moderate treatment has already been tried and did not work.
3. What is the profile of your ideal Pontiff, if we can do this exercise of imagination?
That of Pius XII, the pope of my childhood. That is, a Pope who knows how to lift up and give a supernatural impetus to a people who have been brought prostrate – no longer by the material destruction of the Second World War, but by the moral destruction of woke ideology and hedonistic nihilism, by the ruins of the infernal culture of globalism. A Pope in whose words the sheep recognize the voice of the Divine Shepherd, in whose gestures they see Christ the High Priest, by whose dignity and sacredness they are edified.
A Pope who restores to the Catholic Church the honor to which She is entitled, and which Bergoglio has systematically humiliated and deliberately discredited. I would like a Pope who unites the integral proclamation of Catholic Truths with zeal for the salvation of souls. A Pope who speaks as a Pope, acts as a Pope, dresses as a Pope.
A Pope who is simply the Pope – without inventions, without innovations, without demagogy or false humility. A Pope who allows himself to be guided by the Holy Spirit and returns to Tradition, rather than a puppet of the World Economic Forum who seeks the approval of the world.
4. Former Cardinal McCarrick, against whom you fought so hard, is now dead. However, there are other Cardinals belonging to “currents” that you have attacked. Do you consider your battle within the Church lost?
My battle against the rampant corruption in the Vatican began well before 2018. Ever since my appointment in 1998 as Delegate for Pontifical Representations in the Secretariat of State, I fought strenuously to prevent the appointments and promotions to the episcopate of corrupt and unworthy candidates. This earned me a transfer to the Vatican City State Governorate, where I addressed very serious financial dysfunctions: once again I was removed and transferred to Washington as Apostolic Nuncio.
My denunciations, including my denunciation of the crimes and horrible vices of Cardinal McCarrick – which I had already made to the Superiors of the Secretariat of State in 2006 and then in June 2013 to Bergoglio himself, in person – have never been denied. Everything I denounced turned out to be true.
But what is it that unleashed their fury? It is the fact of having brought to light the link between moral corruption and doctrinal deviation; of having shown how Bergoglio’s propaganda in favor of the psychopandemic fraud and the green deal responded to a single script under a single direction. I was among the first to denounce the Great Reset and to unmask the complicity between the deep state and the deep church in the globalist coup we have witnessed in recent years, and in which Bergoglio’s responsibility is immense.
Along with the scandals I denounced, I exposed the network of blackmail and complicity of this “parallel church” that I call the deep church, based on the same vile vices that allow the deep state to blackmail politicians, government officials, institutional figures, public figures, journalists, doctors, actors . . .
A persecution against me followed, even to the point of excommunication, which was imposed on me by a heretic pornographer, Tucho Fernández, appointed by Bergoglio to demolish the former Holy Office.
The McCarrick line of bishops – which includes Cardinals Farrell, Cupich, McElroy, Wuerl, Gregory, Tobin, and many others – has been promoted to key positions in the Vatican and at the top of the American Catholic Church.
These men maintain very close relations with the Democratic Party, whose woke and pro-immigration policies they support, while President Trump is trying to counteract them. The billions of American taxpayer dollars with which USAID has financed the constellation of “Catholic” non-profit organizations in order to fuel the illegal immigration business, are proof of the financial dependence of the American Church on the deep state.
Now that we are in the period of sede vacante, power is now in the hands of two very corrupt figures: the Substitute of the Secretariat of State, Edgard Peña Parra – whose crimes I have extensively denounced – and the Cardinal Camerlengo, Kevin Farrell.
Farrell was a member of the Legionaries of Christ, the religious congregation that was at the center of a very serious scandal related to the sexual abuse and crimes of its founder, Father Marcial Maciel. Farrell was in charge of managing the Legionaries’ enormous financial resources, and of course he “did not notice” Maciel’s aberrant deviations. . . . Also for this reason he preferred to hide this dark part of his curriculum with the Legionaries of Christ, and precisely because of these “merits” and his proximity to Maciel, Farrell was chosen by McCarrick as his close collaborator. McCarrick made Farrell his Auxiliary Bishop in Washington, where he lived for six years in the same apartment as the then-Archbishop.
Once again he “did not notice” anything . . . . McCarrick entrusted Farrell with the financial management of the Papal Foundation, founded in 1988, when the Vatican was emerging with broken bones from the Marcinkus case and the Banco Ambrosiano scandal. In 1990, after only two years, the Papal Foundation had already raised 215 million dollars: a considerable sum for the disastrous accounts of the Holy See, in order to buy silence and solicit promotions. This fundraising ability of McCarrick earned him untouchability by the Vatican, since the time of John Paul II. In 2007, Farrell was promoted and made Bishop of Dallas; then in 2016 he was transferred to Rome as Prefect of the Super-Dicastery for the Laity, the Family, and Life.
In 2019, he was appointed Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church, despite his notorious addiction to alcohol. Farrell knows all the accomplices of McCarrick’s crimes and will be able to maneuver the upcoming “conclave” by means of blackmail or promises. His utter unworthiness and the scandal he represents – especially for McCarrick’s victims and for American Catholics – must be denounced so as to induce him to renounce his prerogatives as Camerlengo and as a cardinal with voting rights, following the example of the Cardinal of Edinburgh, Keith O’Brien, who after the denunciation of his unworthiness spontaneously withdrew from the Conclave of 2013.
5. There are those who argue that Bergoglio, beyond his media statements, has not actually changed the essence or depth of Catholic doctrine. What do you think?
Bergoglio’s media overexposure made all too apparent the Argentine Jesuit’s duplicity – I would say his strategy of deception. No one ever knew what was going through his head, or whether what he said corresponded to what he really thought. Bergoglio always used people, without any moral scruples, promoting those who were corrupt and getting rid of those who hindered him in his intentions, raging with unheard-of malice against those who were not to his liking (I am thinking here of an excellent employee of the Vatican City Governorate, Eugenio Hasler, son of the former Major of the Swiss Guard, who was destroyed by Bergoglio in 2017).
Bergoglio did not need to change doctrine: he instead managed to make it irrelevant and negligible, creating a certain liquid inclusiveness without dogmas and without ideals. He never wanted to act as Pope, but he made sure that after him no Pope could obtain from Catholics that obedience that he made hateful, because it was extorted in order to support heresies and moral deviations.
He did everything possible so that no “pope” who will emerge from the upcoming “conclave” will be able to question his “papacy” which he intended to characterize as intrinsically his: his property, his invention, with his rites, his ceremonies, his vestments, and his dignitaries. But all this demonstrates that the “papacy” assumed by Bergoglio in 2013 was never the Roman Papacy, and therefore he was not a true Pope.
6. Since you were excommunicated last summer, have you had contact with other Cardinals or high-ranking members of the Vatican hierarchy? Do you think that your positions are more widely shared than they appear?
I have been able to appreciate the spiritual closeness and moral support of many faithful from all over the world and of many priests, but no Cardinal has contacted me. A few bishops have expressed their sympathy.
I do not believe that among my Brothers in the Episcopate there is anyone who has the courage to clearly state that the Second Vatican Council was a subversive act carried out by emissaries of Freemasonry who infiltrated the Church, with the aim of destroying Her from within and enslaving Her to the plans of the New World Order. Nor do I believe that those who are aware of Bergoglio’s fraud want to compromise their position by calling into question the legitimacy of his claim to be the pope.
7. Is there a possibility of some kind of rapprochement with the Vatican on your part?
I have never distanced myself from the Vatican, just as I have never separated myself from the Catholic Church. On the very day of my seventy-fifth birthday, while still living in Washington as Apostolic Nuncio, Bergoglio ordered my expulsion from my Vatican apartment, which John Paul II had ordered me to have for the rest of my life, and also ordered me to be excluded from the residence for retired nuncios in Rome, the Casa San Benedetto.
Not content with having inflicted excommunication on me, Bergoglio also revoked my Vatican citizenship, my Vatican passport, and my Vatican driver’s license which enabled me to move about independently.
I did not leave the Vatican mea sponte, but I recognize that this forced ostracism has allowed me to speak and act freely, something that is not possible for everyone.
By punishing me in this way, Bergoglio also gave a signal to other officials of the Curia about the fate that would await anyone who dares to criticize the Lìder Maximo. On several occasions I have been able to collect expressions of appreciation and respect from my former lay collaborators. Even the Secretary of State Pietro Parolin himself could not help but praise me for my exemplary service to the Holy See. But then of course he added that he “did not understand what happened to me afterwards” . . . .
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
April 29, 2025
S. Petri Martyris
The post Francesco Borgonovo Interviews Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: Bergoglio “Was Never the Roman Papacy” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.