Firstly Stubborn, it’s very arrogant to assume you know the experience of other posters on this forum. You are completely delusional, dishonest and disrespectful. My Cath Info account alone is 10 years old. My first SSPX Mass was in 1985, which started in a hotel. I have never been to a Novus Ordo Mass. I have attended Masses all over the country and the Americas. I was for a time a regular attendee of St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona where I received guidance from some of the best SSPX priests in the country. I’ve visited SSPX chapels in Guatemala and El Salvador. I’ve personally known and befriended several bishops. My wedding was performed by a resistance bishop. I’ve spent hours on buses chatting with Bishop Williamson. I’ve also had many conversations and opportunities to meet with sede bishops, including Bishop Dolan and Bishop Pivarunas. A now sede bishop was a lay brother at my wedding. In the early days of the resistance, I assisted the resistance with many translations between Spanish, Portuguese and English.

That’s a lot more than some “dip pop with 5 or ten years in this crisis”.
I didn’t just wake up one day and say “you know what, I feel like making divisions among all my lifelong friends and family by accepting a position contrary to theirs”. No. I arrived at the conclusion of sede vacante through constant reading and ruminating upon the crisis in the Church.

Quote:
Yikes, this "obey God rather than man" stuff is scary non-Catholic thinking.  When a Pope teaching, he's acting as Christ's Vicar.  This is not about Jorge spewing nonsense on his pope-plane or in an interview with Scalfari, but about the man you claim to be the Vicar of Christ teaching with the authority of St. Peter, which is the authority of Christ.

So, is this an absolute statement?  Old Catholics decided they were obeying God rather than man in rejecting papal infallibility as contrary to Tradition.  Were they obeying God rather than man also?  If so, how can you find fault with them?  On what basis?

Let those who claim this maxim applies to Papal authority explain why the Old Catholics were wrong.  This should be interesting.

2V, I consider you a very special, a very blessed Catholic in the eyes of God who got bitten by the sede bug. I feel certain those who were raised, shall we just say, outside of the Church, received many, many - and extra special graces to get you into the Church. IOW, you are one who is extra, extra special to God.....for reasons only He knows. I believe this, always have and always will.

You take offense when sedes get slammed, well, I take offense when sedes intentionally, and not intentionally lie about reasons non-sedes are not sede, that we are heretics and the like - then completely ignore explanations and refutations as they just stay the course of their BS - this is what I am calling out as BS.

I've been in this my whole life and have remained as I am for many reasons, but I think mainly from seeing what happens to others who've changed - always ends up being for the worse. So when some dip pops in who has experienced a whole 5 or 10 years of this crisis and starts spouting BS against Catholic truths as a means to defend sedeism, I decided to start calling that what it is.

More BS.

I am calling it out as a lie for 2 reasons, 1) THAT'S WHAT IT IS. 2) You refuse to admit it because you gotta maintain a vacant chair at all costs. Nothing else really matters.
You said get real - this ^ is real.

Is it possible that the Archbishop was wrong or even that your understanding of him is incorrect?

 The Archbishop should not be the absolute standard on which you base your understanding of tradition on.

The Archbishop merely put into words what we believed and lived then, now, and (hopefully) will until we die. +ABL is not my absolute standard for anything, what he is, is one of tradition's/traditional Catholics' hero's.  The problem sedes will have with his declaration, is that (with good reason) he not only does not blame the pope, he never even mentions his name.

What I find remarkable is that you cannot fathom that it is even remotely possible that it might be you who are wrong, I'm not sure exactly why, but I find that fact somewhat fascinating, I guess I always have.

Again, here is the magisterium +ABL speaks of, all you need to do is believe these popes, which far as I can tell, is impossible for sedes to do.

I believe that's because sedes believe that those clear papal quotes only applied prior to V2, and that since then "the magisterium has been corrupted."

Sedes believe this contrary-to-the-popes' teachings because although sedes think they know what the Church's Magisterium is, in reality they do not know what Church's Magisterium is. Worse yet, they think it is something it is not. But to settle the matter within the sede mind, imo all they need to do is believe those popes.

 It is with good reason that +ABL never said we MUST proclaim sede vacante, and we must name this new de fide doctrine sedevacantism and we must build our entire faith around it, being ever watchful not to impede in any way on this new doctrine. +ABL never said to split up, divide out, and whoever wants go get consecrated as sede bishops, and get away from all other Catholics who will not accept that the pope is not the pope. He never said anything of the sort.

He said one day we may be able to say the pope is not the pope.