CathInfo.com

So, in your opinion, it does not really matter if any holiness still exists in the conciliar church, since heretics reign there, and we can't be in communion with heretics? I'm just trying to clarify your position.

This is not an opinion. It is a matter of fact that heretics reign in the material structures of the Church and where there is heresy there is no holiness, regardless of appearances. The Arians were known for their penances, prayers, zeal, and good works but it availed them for naught since they had no faith on account of their one single heresy.

Also, yes, madame, a Catholic cannot be in communion with a heretic by divine law.

See, it's OK for YOU to "interpret" papal teaching and then declare your conclusions dogmatic, but not for the sedevacantists, eh?  This is talking about the ESSENTIAL perpetuity and visibility of the Holy See. 

I didn't provide an interpretation, nor did I declare that the interpretation I didn't provide was dogmatic.  It was you who provided an interpretation.  Let's see how you did. 

You interpret Pius XII as teaching that the Holy See is what remains essentially visible, whereas what Pius XII actually said is that "it is absolutely necessary that the Supreme Head, that is, the Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth, be visible to the eyes of all."  

The Holy See is the Apostolic see of Rome (the diocese of Rome). 

"The Vicar of Jesus Christ on earth" is the actual reigning Pope, not the diocese of Rome.

We know that a prolonged vacancy of the Holy See is possible, and that too contradicts your interpretation of this teaching.

The longest vacancy of the Holy See has been less than three years, and the episcopate remained one and the same moral body during the interregnum.  And no sane person would claim that the Holy See has been vacant since '89 or '58, nor is that what the insane Sedevacantists are really claiming.  They are claiming that a series of false Pope have been reigning in the Holy See for over 60 years, and that the entire episcopate has recognized them as the legitimate Popes the entire time.  That is a denial of the indefectibility of the Church.

As for your second issue, I've repeatedly argued that there can be and are people who are formally Catholic who are nevertheless materially divided due to the Crisis.  This is the second time now that you've straw-manned me with the arguments of the dogmatic sedevacantists, which I have consistently opposed.  In fact, I argue that there are some bishops in the Church who continue to exercise ordinary jurisdiction.

You are missing the point Ladislaus.  You maintain that the universal Church based on Rome lacks the four marks.  If that is the case, the universal Church based in Rome is a false Church, and anyone who belongs to that Church, de facto, belongs to a false Church. How could Siri be an active member of the governing body of this false Church while at the same time being the Pope of the true Church?  What kind of warped ecclesiology is that?

Lastly, you said "some bishops of the Church" continue to exercise jurisdiction.  What Church are you referring to?  The Church is a visible, hierarchical society with four marks.  Since you believe the visible, hierarchical society based on Rome lacks the four marks, what Church do these bishops with ordinary jurisdiction belong to?

It is one thing to say that members of a false Church can be united to the soul of the true Church, but it is impossible to maintain that members of a false Church can simultaneously be united to the body - much less the governing body - of the true Church, which is precisely what you are claiming. 

This warped and heretical ecclesiology is a direct result of the Sedevacantist errors and heresies that you have embraced.