SJB said:The bond of a common Faith still exists. This is why the traditional layman should detest any breaking of these bonds.
This is also why many traditionalists were and are uncomfortable with the raising of some unauthorized theological opinions to dogmatic facts (even if they agree with the position being elevated.)
Is this your mantra? Seriously, SJB, why do you even call yourself a sede? I know people in the you-know-what that are more sede-sounding than you. Maybe I missed it, but I almost never see you defending sedevacantism these days, you only rail against "dogmatic sedes." With friends like these...
If you have doubt about your position, then maybe you should give it up, but please stop telling others they shouldn't be convinced by theirs. This constant pushing of "non-dogmatic" sedevacantism is truly "mou du genou."
What are you trying to accomplish? Am I supposed to get a warm and fuzzy feeling and say, ah, SJB is right, it really doesn't matter what position one takes, we're all Catholics... Can't we all just get along?
Of course you're right, a bond still exists, there are true Catholics even in the Novus Ordo. But don't you think it's a little legalistic to constantly refer to sedevacantism being an opinion? For a long time, technically speaking, the Immaculate Conception of Mary was also just an "opinion," get what I'm saying?
Someone in the you-know-what like CathMomof7, who just isn't ready to make the leap and say that the man who appears to be the Pope isn't the Pope, that I can understand. I wrestled with this myself and I wasn't as confident about sedevacantism as I sounded for a good long while. But for someone like you for whom sedevacantism presumably HAS clicked, who understands the issues involved, the theology involved, it makes much less sense to me, the way you talk.