You labeled this as "Ladislaus' glossary" ... and that is what I took exception to, the implication that these are terms that I somehow coined or invented.

Only thing that's somewhat unique to myself is the distinction between Father Chazal and classic R&R, but I have explained that repeatedly on this thread.  It is in fact, the entire point of the thread, pointing out that Father Chazal departs from the predominant R&R model, which hold that the popes have authority but may be disobeyed on case-by-case basis.  As for not all Traditional Catholics defining things this way, what I described is in fact that way R&R has been defined by its proponents for at least the past 20 years.  Archbishop Lefebvre's position was much more nuanced, as I have also pointed out on this thread, but among his followers, the subtleties have been lost, and the way it's repeatedly been defined is that we acknowledge the pope and his authority, but disobey various teaching/commands that are contrary to Tradition.

And, yes, all Trads who are informed know what is meant by sedeprivationism. 

Since what he claims is taught at V1 is really not taught at V1, when he does not post what he claims is taught at V1 it will be because it's not taught at V1, but he will not let that stop him.

So, the chief problem that some of us have with R&R is that R&R undermines and guts the foundations of the Magisterium and the papacy, throwing the Church under the proverbial bus in order to save Bergoglio et al., to have the comfort of some clown prancing aroud in white vestments.

But Father Chazal has thrown you a lifeline.  By adopting his sede-impoundist views, you don't have to attribute this evil to legitimate Catholic authority and therefore bring ill repute on the Church.

So please explain why you refuse to get behind Father Chazal's position ... which is perfectly acceptable to most "sedevacantists" in that it avoids the chief problem with R&R that most SVs have.  It could also serve as a bridge behind the two camps.

So please explain why, given the Chazal option, you persist in smearing the Holy Catholic Church and the Catholic papacy as being responsible for the evils of the Conciliar erea.  What's wrong with it that you find it unacceptable?

If R&R would rally around Father Chazal, then there's no longer any serious divide among Traditional Catholics, and the major differences would reduce to an academic debate regarding the finer points of sede-impoundism vs sede-privationism.

Boomer tier take, ignoring things doesn't make them go away, they will continue to get worse. The bolded section really highlights the selfishness. It's because the previous generations didn't deal with their problems that we are now left with the mess..

• 1. A literary work in which human foolishness or vice is attacked through irony, derision, or wit.
• 2. The branch of literature constituting such works.
• 3. Irony, sarcasm, or caustic wit used to attack or expose human foolishness or vice.

I suggest everyone get behind Father Noidea’s theory of Derelectionism.  It is by far the most peaceful irresolution to this crisis.  All we are required to do is live our own best Catholic lives. Leave the seat vacant or an apostate the Pope for our children to deal with. However one is comfortable framing the mysterious crisis, it will work for every stripe of Traditionalist and foster unity.  If the Greatest Generation ignored Assisi and Wojtyla, certainly we can feel justified ignoring Jorge the apostate.  If a problem is too complex it’s best to leave it for the next generation. Father was inspired by the Art of Manliness handbook, specifically the chapter on Home Invasion where it outlines how to run to your prie-dieu and pray to Our Lord that he remove the armed intruders or just end the world. 

satire

săt′īr″
noun

• 1. A literary work in which human foolishness or vice is attacked through irony, derision, or wit.
• 2. The branch of literature constituting such works.
• 3. Irony, sarcasm, or caustic wit used to attack or expose human foolishness or vice.

Quote from: Mithrandylan 13/05/2023, 00:42:41
Yeah, Anthony, Melanie's post was satirical. Top-tier, at that
Try reading it again.

Another interesting implication of the Canon Law is that those with illicit and even invalid jurisdiction on account of excommunication are explicitly supplied jurisdiction via the code if the faithful approach them for the Sacraments.