CathInfo.com

I don't agree with +Sanborn that ordinary jurisdiction would be required, given a state of emergency.  That opinion is based on an article written by Father Ricossa back in 1993, and it makes a couple of mistakes in reaching that conclusion:  1) cites Canon Law ... that deal with an EcuмENICAL Council (which this wouldn't be) and 2) doesn't prove that said law is of divine law, either directly or derived from it somehow.

So, the issue is HOW could such a Council have authority to effectively bind the consciences of Catholics to accept their election.  Sure, one way would be if pretty much all the bishops with jurisdiction would hold it.  But the other way would be from the bottom up where Catholics universally accept the Council's election as representing the Church.

Given lack of jurisdiction, Universal Acceptance would be the only way ... and, unless you believe that "the Church" = a handful of Totalist SV +Thuc-line bishops ... to the exclusion of CT, to the exclusion of all "Doubt & Resist", to the exclusion of all Eastern Rite Catholics (millions), to the exclusion of all Conciliar Catholic whom may be in material error only (also millions) ... even moderate SVs would not exclude all these from the Church, so the Totalists wouldn't even get all other Totalists "on board".  Despite my sympathy with CT, in practice I don't believe the Conciliar hierarchy have even material jurisdiction, so in that sense I'm a Totalist ... but I find it preposterous to say that a handful of Totalists could define themselves as "the Church" and that a handful of those bishops would constitutes a representation of the Universal Church.

If they did that and the CMRI dusted off +Shuckhardt's Hadrian VII costume for Pope Pivarunas, they'd have to check with Linus Von Pentz first, since that endeavor would only represent a difference of degree, and not a qualitative difference from that "election".