CathInfo.com

I'll add that not giving an answer to whether Beegoglio is the Pope is equivalent to not answering these questions:

Is denying the Council of Trent binds Protestants compatible with possessing the Catholic faith?

Is the Church one in faith, or can the Pope have a different faith from the Church? (Basic Catechism)

Can the Pope be outside the Church?

Can the Church promulgate a heretical ecuмenical council?

Can the Church habitually teach heresy through every single organ of authority for sixty years?

Is worshipping a pagan idol compatible with possessing the Catholic faith?

And on and on and on... Remaining undecided is simply not an option, and anyway, the answer to all of these is pure common sense, nothing special required to answer them except the Catholic faith.

The so-called sedevacantist doctrine is just the Catholic belief in the papacy.

I'm not setting myself up as anything and even if I was an independent bishop my words wouldn't be binding as you seem to think (you may as well be Orthodox, they have the most bishops who don't submit to the Pope like you).

How you can continue to disingenuously present this as if I am speaking of my own authority and not merely repeating Church teaching is really an indictment of your bad will.

Who gave you, a lay woman, the authority to reject approved liturgical rites?

Who gave you, a lay woman, the authority to reject an ecuмenical council?

Who gave you, a lay woman, the authority to reject solemnly promulgated canon law?

Who gave you, a lay woman, the authority to reject the governing authority of the Supreme Pontiff?

You are condemned out of your own mouth.

👍👍👍

I just noticed so I'll comment on this as well.

The positions are mutually exclusive and one of them has to be true. So you're not a fan and not satisfied with the truth whatever position is correct.

What you're actually not a fan of is probably the discomfort the division that the sword of truth necessarily causes.

There is nothing unsatisfactory with the Catholic doctrine of the papacy, as you correctly stated, it only seems to us that something is off because we are looking at it with human eyes, not the eyes of faith.

I was thinking about this debate, and I remember St. Vincent Ferrer:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Ferrer:

Antipope Clement VII lived at Avignon in France, and Pope Urban VI in Rome. Vincent was convinced that the election of Urban was invalid, although Catherine of Siena was just as devoted a supporter of the Roman pope. In the service of Cardinal Pedro de Luna, Vincent worked to persuade Spaniards to follow Clement. When Clement died in 1394, Cardinal de Luna was elected as the second antipope successor to the Avignon papacy and took the name Benedict XIII.[10]

Vincent and his brother Boniface, General of the Carthusians, were loyal to Benedict XIII, commonly known as "Papa Luna" in Castile and Aragon.[6] He worked for Benedict XIII as apostolic penitentiary and Master of the Sacred Palace.

St. Vincent served an antipope, and is still a saint. The antipope was not a heretic, I imagine. Nevertheless, it is an interesting story when we think of the current crisis.

Another thing that came to my mind is: did the heretic bishops of the Arian crisis lose office? Was there ever something related to this declared by any Pope?

I remember that I read once someone claiming that there were heretic bishops during the 1950s. It was the one who condemned Fr. Feeney who was mentioned, if I am not mistaken. Did this supposed heretics lose office? Pius XII did not disapprove them, as far as I am aware.

I am just saying that this whole question might not be as simple to solve. This is my point. 

We all know (or at least we should know) that we can't follow the Conciliar Popes, but the usual Sedevacantist arguments sound shallow to my ears, as the R&R arguments saying that these Popes are not manifest heretics.

The Cassiciacuм Thesis is somewhat more interesting, as it goes a bit deeper than most Sedevacantist arguments. It might be not true, but it somehow sounds better to me. Plus, it was elaborated by a very competent and qualified pre-conciliar theologian.