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.

I really don't have to define anything.  I'm speaking about those who claim that 1) Vatican II and the NOM are bad and harmful, 2) while holding that the V2 popes are legitimate, and 3) not embracing Father Chazal's position.  This is clear from the context.

Father Chazal is not R&R.  R&R hold that that the popes have legitimate authority that can be disobeyed on a case-by-case basis.

This is a distraction.  I address the question to those who meet the above critiera.

So, get on with it, and answer the question.  If you accept Father Chazal's position, then the question is not for you.  If you a sedevacantist or sedeprivationist, the question is not for you.

This so laughable. When did Fr. Chazal say he is a sede-impoundist? And when did he ever say that anyone has to agree with his views anyway? There is no way that he would ever say that he is a sede-impoundist, and that everyone has to get behind him. How ridiculous. 

I must say that this comes right out of a comic book because it would be hilarious if it weren't so tragic.

But the answer to the question posed in the title of this thread is, there is no reason to get behind any flavor of sedeism.

Sure, it doesn't matter to Old Catholics like yourself.  It matters to actual Catholics, though, but feel free to recuse ourself from this discussion.  What's really tragic, Stubborn, is all the Trads who have abandoned Catholicism in favor of a slight variation Old Catholicism just to keep having Bergoglio be their "pope" ... of course, a pope they ignore and who's good for nothing other than to put a picture of his smiling face in your vestibule.  But, by all means, carry on.

He had a longer term for it, which I have abbreviated to sede-impoundist for conveniece.  So go ahead and replace sede-impoundist with "Father Chazal's position" and answer the question, instead of distracting with stupidity.

Don't have to answer any question. You are guilty of lying big-time about Fr. Chazal. 

Until recently, I'd never heard of this then I asked a friend about it.  The description I received sounded basically just like the Thesis.  Asked another friend about that and he said, 'yeah, it's basically the Thesis.'  Not sure I can be bothered enough to check out Fr. Chazal's hair-splitting.

I know this wasn't directed at me/my position, but what is the difference between Fr Chazal's position and the Cassiciacuм Thesis?  And if there really isn't one, why doesn't he just take on the CT position?

Sure, it doesn't matter to Old Catholics like yourself.  It matters to actual Catholics, though, but feel free to recuse ourself from this discussion.  What's really tragic, Stubborn, is all the Trads who have abandoned Catholicism in favor of a slight variation Old Catholicism just to keep having Bergoglio be their "pope" ... of course, a pope they ignore and who's good for nothing other than to put a picture of his smiling face in your vestibule.  But, by all means, carry on.

No, the status of the pope does not matter, not to me and not to you, we will both do what we need to do to keep the faith and save our soul regardless of the sins of heresy he commits, or the sins of apostacy he commits, and whatever other mortal sins he commits publicly or privately.

His sins to dot affect my faith or me getting to heaven, if they effect your faith and your getting to heaven then you need to work on that because they shouldn't.