Oh, yes, I forgot Matto. My apologies to him. He also believes in a Catholic version of the BoD hypothesis.
It seems rather commonplace for BoB/BoD to go hand in hand with sedevacantism. I don't know any of the latter who are not also adherents of the former. Your post seems to support that too: as far as I could tell, Arvinger, Nishant and Matto are not sedes.
.
1. Sede
2. Have asked members here and elsewhere to elaborate on this Catholic(?) BO(?).
1. Response? none.
Frankly, esp. outside the comparatively tiny cat wrangle of CI, I find Sededefectists to hold to BoD, in myriad iterations and mutation.
What they rarely DON'T hold to is either Liguori or Aquinas in the matter, which makes them super-special, esp. when they, with the consistency of a madman, froth at the gob otherwise.
This is often accompanied by calling SV heresy, yet when asked to JUSTify that with specs, the most you ever really get is bits of V1 with the word "primacy" oddly glossed over or, more likely, omitted entirely.
TL;DR/Crayon version
1. There is no pope this side of the dirt.
2. Not SACRAMENTALLY baptised = Hell
3. Not Catholic = Hell
So, another SV who REJECTS BoD/B.
I would ask again for this allegedly non-heretical version, but why bother yet again?
Topic: People needing baptism, raised from the dead, etc. (Read 16374 times)