Tradition is indeed living, but only in the sense that lesser (small “t”) traditions can develop in a homogeneous way, never by mutation or rupture. The error of historicism falsely concludes that “we are in different times,” as if truth itself could change. In reality, the crisis remains objectively the same as it was in Archbishop Lefebvre’s day, and he already provided the clear Catholic answers to it. Those answers remain valid because they were drawn from what Eternal Rome had already settled long before the Second Vatican Council. A handful of faithful Resistance priests continue this same fidelity today, preserving the unbroken attitude of the past thirty years.

Personally I think that if you stick to what you think is the right opinion decided by only one person, then your view of the situation gets very narrow.

You are correct Truth does not change, but how it is applied to different situations needs to be addressed.  We are no longer living under Pope John Paul 2, we currently have Pope Leo XIV who has down graded Our Lady.  Do you think +Lefebvre would react the same way to both Popes?

....

I sincerely hope, for the sake of His Excellency’s soul, that this take is not true. And if it is, may it be the result of weakness or confusion in his later years rather than deliberate deceit. It is far more charitable to believe that he succuмbed to liberal influences or infirmity than to think he acted as a conscious infiltrator against the Faith.

He was not guilty of liberalism.

So... Is it your position that if a bishop does anything bad that the bishop from whom that bishop descended is to blame?  I hope the Apostles realize that all the heresies and schisms perpetuated by bishops of their lines are their fault!

Absolutely not.

The position I have is very simple.

That Thuc and his sacraments have obviously bad fruits. They cannot possibly be where the remnant is. 

Rather the resistance is.

I'm going to step in here and defend the sedevacantists because my gripe is only with the dogmatic ones.

The issue is not that it is "not traditional". It is a legitimate theological opinion. And its not about "keeping it to themselves".

The issue is those who make it a dogma.

Such a silly response as yours is why so many of them turn dogmatic. You make them feel like they are ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs or something.

Of course you are going to defend them - your own stance is not much different; a novel stance that claims it is more Catholic than any other Catholic. And yes it is novel. The Church does not teach and has never taught sedevacantism. So I repeat, it is a perceived theological opinion, not a real one. As a parish we have already had a gutful of Sede's trying to push their opinions on us as if they were dogmas. So, yes, it is about keeping their errors to themselves for the overall good of the parish. No one wants their children corrupted with this poison. What starts out as 'a discussion' always ends with Sedes trying to forcefully convert the faithful to their way of thinking and I have witnessed families break apart over this. This is because it is rooted in pride - "I know better". And it is the very same spirit that emulates from you - "Join the Resistance or you are not Catholic".  I have all the time in the world for Catholics who are tempted with Sede-vacantism - it is hard to understand how our recent Popes can be doing what they are doing - but when you start down that road trying to make converts to your position as if it was an established truth, I will treat you like an active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. The safety of our children demands it.

I thought your position was that Thuc was invalid?  The idea of 'bad fruits' is a separate argument altogether.

Potentially invalid, withe the bad fruits seeming to strengthen that opinion. At least telling us to steer clear

Of course you are going to defend them - your own stance is not much different; a novel stance that claims it is more Catholic than any other Catholic. And yes it is novel. The Church does not teach and has never taught sedevacantism. So I repeat, it is a perceived theological opinion, not a real one. As a parish we have already had a gutful of Sede's trying to push their opinions on us as if they were dogmas. So, yes, it is about keeping their errors to themselves for the overall good of the parish. No one wants their children corrupted with this poison. What starts out as 'a discussion' always ends with Sedes trying to forcefully convert the faithful to their way of thinking and I have witnessed families break apart over this. This is because it is rooted in pride - "I know better". And it is the very same spirit that emulates from you - "Join the Resistance or you are not Catholic".  I have all the time in the world for Catholics who are tempted with Sede-vacantism - it is hard to understand how our recent Popes can be doing what they are doing - but when you start down that road trying to make converts to your position as if it was an established truth, I will treat you like an active ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ. The safety of our children demands it.

I agree with you… the sede position is harmful and I know a couple of family fathers who have taken this route and in two cases it has destroyed their family. Older children don’t attend Mass anymore.