CathInfo.com

I wonder what level of culpability the silent hierarchy shares for their grave failure to declare his heresy and deposition?

It's hard for them to do when they themselves are 99% heretical and deposed also.  I bet that you have maybe a dozen bishops throughout the world who would find Bergoglio's promotion of sodomy to be heretical.  We only had, what, FOUR of them, who had the courage to put their name to the critique of Amoris Laetitia. That's part of the issue with the Unviersal Acceptance argument.  Accepted by whom ... this gaggle of Modernist heretics?

What kind of idiotic response is that??
You want me to personally depose the pope?
Only sedes do that!!
Ps: Who have I condemned in the hierarchy that has declared the see vacant?
Are you sniffing glue?

https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/the-crisis-in-the-church-is-a-supernatural-mystery/msg665496/#msg665496

The Dictionary of Dogmatic Theology by Parente under the definition of "hierarchy" says the following, "Those members of the Church who belong to the twofold hierarchy are called clerics".  So every Catholic cleric is a member of the ecclesiastical hierarchy.  Not to be confused with the Teaching Body which only includes those bishops who possess an office with ordinary jurisdiction.

Sean, you have serious reading comprehension problems.  Not to mention a mental block when it comes to sede vacantism.  ALL Catholic theologians without exception agree with the dogma that under no circuмstances whatsoever may anyone judge the pope.  No layman, no priest, no bishop and no cardinal has the authority to judge and depose a pope.  So when you ask the question, "You want me to personally depose the pope?", you are implying that only a member of the hierarchy could depose the pope (or a group of members of the hierarchy).  But that is false.  They can't depose the pope either.  But in your previous post you asked why the hierarchy hadn't deposed the pope for heresy.  The answer is that they can't depose the pope.  You also asked why they hadn't declared him to be a manifest heretic.  Well a declaration like that isn't a juridical act so anyone can do that.  It doesn't matter if you are a cardinal, a priest or a layman, a declaration that a man is a manifest heretic has no juridical force whatsoever.  But the manifest heresy itself has the effect of deposing a man from membership in the Catholic Church along with the loss of any and all ecclesiastical offices he might possess.  Either the man really is a manifest heretic or he isn't.  If he isn't a heretic then it doesn't matter what anyone declares (whether they be a cardinal or a layman makes no difference) because the man is still the pope.  But if he is a manifest heretic then likewise it doesn't matter what anyone declares, the man is NOT THE POPE.  So you won't make a declaration but you are faulting the hierarchy for not making a declaration.  Meanwhile, many members of the hierarchy actually did declare him a heretic but you condemn and mock them for doing so.  I guess they weren't the right members of the hierarchy for you.  But that just makes you intellectually inconsistent (some would say dishonest).  There is no doubt in my mind that if Vigano declared George Bergoglio to be a manifest heretic you would drop him like a hot potato.

Either the man really is a manifest heretic or he isn't.

I don't even really care about Bergoglio that much.  Either the Conciliar Church is the Catholic Church or it is not.  To claim that this abomination is the Catholic Church raises the same ire in me as someone who might call my mother a whore.  That's really what this Conciliar Church is, the prophesied Whore of Babylon.