What's he supposed to say? The SSPX doesn't tell people to research the issue with an open mind, and that it's ok to doubt the pope. They say the current claimant is pope, or they don't say anything. They downplay opposing arguments as baseless nonsense.

What the SSPX USED TO say, and what the Resistance continues to say, is exactly what Archbishop Lefebvre, the guide given us by Providence, concluded; and that is, that when we look into the theology, the problem is not as simple as we might have thought, and that it is a good presumption that the man held to be Pope by the Church is the Pope, and that we should continue to pray for him as Pope. At the same time, it is clear (to all except the Neo-SSPX) that, as the Archbishop said: "It is a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself from this Conciliar Church for as long as it does not rediscover the Tradition of the Church and of the Catholic Faith". 

To "tell people to research the issue with an open mind" would only cause unnecessary confusion, chaos and division. In practice, it has also led to Catholics isolating themselves from the Mass and the sacraments. We are not meant to be theologians, let alone solve disputed theological questions that the Church has not pronounced upon. Follow the guide God gave us. It's worked well for all these years, and it will continue to keep us safe until Rome re-crowns Our Lord Jesus Christ as King.

Sean has done a good deal of good for the Catholic cause. May God and Our Lady keep him and his family safe. Let us pray for him.

Why do you even care?

Is your life so empty that you need Sean to fill it?

Why do you care if I care or not? 

Is your life so empty that you need me to fill it?

So ... I stopped posting here largely for this reason, that this board has become an open forum for slander and character assassination.

Until Sean Johnson proves otherwise, regarding his change of position ... we give him the benefit of the doubt that he's sincere.  I do not see him excoriating those who do not agree with him, other than the neo-SSPX, but then he's been doing that for decades.

This is the same kind of thing I objected to when it was being done to Archbishop Vigano (the Satanic sun-worshipping Mason who faked his conversion to ... do not sure what), to Shia Labeouf (fake conversion), to many others.

If ANYONE would have a bone to pick with Sean, it would be I ... since at one point he got so furious with me for simply having quoted Archbishop Lefebvre that he wasn't completely opposed to sedevacantism that he called me a sodomite.

But none of us can cast stones.  We've all lost our cool out of frustration here or there.

Having been one of Sean's greatest adversaries on a number of points, I welcome him aboard.  Then, even if he were to change back to his prior view, then no hard feelings there either.  I'm going to assume the best until I have solid evidence to the contrary or there's some potential for harm being done, but until then we extend to Sean the charity that we are obliged to have toward all.

I pray that God does not remember my past sins and transgressions as some people here won't forgive for Archbishop Vigano, Sha Labeour, or Sean Johnson ... or even Mr. Keyboard Man (not sure what happened there), who was being raked over the coals for some failings of his in the past, without any context ... and without establishing any relevance for how it affected the allegations he was making.  I can't dare hold anyone's past against him, since I would most certainly then deserve to be cast into the deepest pits of Hell.

Just because +Vigano was a high-ranking member of the Conciliar Church for years, some won't forgive him and take every opportunity to slander him.  What of St. Paul?  He was putting Christians to death.  Now, if someone had AT LEAST some kind of credible cui bono regarding what harm +Vigano might be doing in faking a conversion to Tradition, I'm all ears.  But no one has provided a shred of evidence.  That reminds me of those who used to accuse +Lefebvre of being controlled opposition.  What did he accomplish thereby?  Were it not for him, the Traditional movement would be dead, no Ecclesia Dei groups, no sedevacantists (most of whom started out with him, etc. -- naturally speaking, of course, since God could then have raised someone else up.  I believe Father Leo Carley, whom I have the great blessing to know, going on 91, is one of the last original ORCM priests left, and he's still offering daily Mass, where you can set your watch to when he goes into the Confessional, starts Mass, etc. ... twice on Holy Days, and he still drives nearly 2 hours to WV every Sunday to care for about a dozen souls there.  But without +Lefebvre, that would be the state of Traditional Catholicism.

There's also this slander against so-called flip-floppers, where sometimes, especially in the political arena, that could be considered a sign of insincerity.  But in the current Crisis, where everyone's confused ... I see it as a great sign of intellectual honesty, where someone is willing to admit, even if implicitly ... yeah, you know what, I was wrong.  I have more respect for the "flip-floppers" than for those who have remained intransigient in their position for decades, since to me it doesn't necessarily prove that they've been right all these years, but most likely just that they've been very hard-headed.

In any case, we give Sean every benefit of the doubt ... unless he proves otherwise and we have some legitimate criticism to make of him.  Other than that, I, his greatest nemesis here for years, hold no grudges whatsoever and welcome him aboad, and then if he goes off in some other direction, I wish him all the best.

You call virtue signaling loyalty, ok.
 It might be best for you if you stick to posting and reading only about jooz as I never or rarely post in those threads.
 

As if your exalted intelligence is such a threat to my inadequate pea brain that I should avoid you???