It is reported that Burke has received back his privileges through ANTIPOPE Prevost who has enacted a decree to repeal a rescript by ANTIPOPE Bergoglio that had withdrawn a housing subsidy from cardinals which affected Burke.

BREAKING: Cardinal Burke slams FSSPX -

Our Lady never said that. You are quoting a fraudulent later version of La Salette. The hierarchy of the Vatican may be blind/compromised, but it is still the Church as ordained by Christ. The SSPX is simply the cell of the Church which holds firm and sees clear.

By what authority you claim this is fraudulent and never came from the mouth of Our Lady? Do you also claim later discovered "two worm-ridden popes" statement is also fraudulent?

Yeah!

That is so not true...

Which Vatican? Methinks attributive adjective should always be used.
Modernist Vatican in this case. At best.
Heretical Vatican? Or...
Apostate Vatican should be more appropriate, no?

@Ivan Tomas
The Vatican City State established in the 1920's perhaps.

Wrong. You speak like a protestant. Upon this rock - the gates of hell will not prevail. Scripture makes it clear: the Church = Papacy = indefectible.

Completely false statement of you and bishop Schneider: Christ never said "gates of Hell will not prevail against Vatican", Christ never promised Rome would remain Catholic, and no, Church is not a man who dresses like Catholic pope but teaches Antichristic false religion and promotes sodomy. Our Church and our Faith is not about how we dress and who we pretend to be it is about the Faith we confess and live by. Only those who obey Christs commandments are His disciples!

@Carol H
1. The Church is not tantamount to the Papacy no matter how the Petrine Office is important as the keeper and defendant of the Faith.
2. What if "post-conciliar popes" defected from the Petrine office rejecting the very rules of this office? (BTW, the indefectibility question rather supplies arguments for the stance that "post-conciliar popes" are not Popes at all)
3. If somebody acknowledges the Petrine authority but sees that the nominal holder of that authority ceases to fill fundamental duties of the office (and it is the notorious, long-lasting state) - it is not Protestant at all.
4. The main practical problem of today times (until the Church decides on the whole post-conciliar revolution question) IMHO is not whether the post-conciliar popes are popes (as individual persons, laity in particular, cannot decide/judge on that question) but whether, taking into account the Church authorities negligence/inaction with respect to the objective, long time state of doubtful/suspicious popes behavior (not delving into subjective things e.g. their state of mind, culpability, etc. e.g. whether they were guilty of sin of heresy or not) Catholics may decide not to have communion with them.
And taking into account history of Arian and semi-arian problem (for example St. Hilary of Poitiers, Doctor of the Church was holding Liberius as anathema) as well as Bellarmine's (probably the most sound mind in these difficult matters) comments on western schism of 14th and 15th century - incl. the saying: "a doubtful pope is no pope at all" (cf. also De Romano Pontifice, lib. II):
“Then two years later came the lapse of Liberius, of which we have spoken above. Then indeed the Roman clergy, stripping Liberius of his pontifical dignity, went over to Felix, whom they knew to be a Catholic. From that time, Felix began to be the true Pontiff. For although Liberius was not a heretic, nevertheless he was considered one, on account of the peace he made with the Arians, and by that presumption the pontificate could rightly be taken from him: for men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple, and condemn him as a heretic") I think in they may and they should if their conscience dictates it for the very good of their souls.

Yes, the Church IS tantamount to the Papacy. Christ made it clear: the Rock = the Pope. It is the very foundation of the Church. Without this rock the Church cannot stand. The two are one. And Christ said that the gates of hell would NOT prevail against it. Moreover the Church itself teaches that the Catholic Church is indefectible and eternal as Christ is indefectible and eternal. Now you come along and claim that the Church as a whole has failed; that there is no Pope since Vatican II and that there is no visible Church since then as well. Your above examples do not support your anti-Catholic claims. They are merely examples of when the CHURCH itself deposed of a suspect Pope for another. This is the perfect example of how the Holy Ghost has stopped the gates of hell from prevailing.

@Carol H
"Yes, the Church IS tantamount to the Papacy"
---
A completely unrealistic approach ignoring the Catholic doctrine and Church history.
Hyperpapalism at its worst I dare to say.

@Carol With such approach you don't need Christ, a man in white is elevated to His level. Besides, we do have a Pope: the Keys of Church have returned to St. Peter. Certainly not heretics and betrayers in Vatican.

I wouldn't doubt that the modernists in Rome WANT this - not because they agree with it, BUT it will give cause to excommunicate ALL who have "schismatic tendencies" as the heretics in the Vatican put it!

@Orthocat
Good. Let us all prepare for the final battle then.
It is better than lukewarm truce time.

@Orthocat Heretics in Rome have no capacity to excommunicate anyone since they are excommunicated