CathInfo.com

There are many problems with the sede claim. First, you are not Catholic. One can put a mitre on and hold a crosier, but he is no more a bishop than you or me. Your religion is man generated - every sede group in man generated! A layman in just about every case sought out episcopal ordination and broke from the Church.
Most sede camps are severely undereducated! In fact CMRI consults "Novus Ordo" theologians on issues! Ha! At least SSPX has a quality seminary and if accpted back in the church would retain all canonical offices. CMRI, not so much. They would be lay people again - thus begging the question - Do CMRI adherents really want the "crisis" to end?
Another issue is that sede groups are not unified and if I am not mistaken, the latin mass is not what we are talking about. The list goes on and on. Here is the edict against Thuc. Enjoy.

SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

Notification*

 His Excellency Mons. Pierre Martin Ngô-dinh-Thuc, titular Archbishop of Bulla Regia, in the month of January 1976 ordained several priests and bishops in the village of Palmar de Troya in Spain, in a way which was completely illicit. Consequently, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on 17 September of the same year, issued a decree (cf. AAS LXVIII, 1976, p. 623), mentioning the canonical penalties incurred both by himself and by the others who were thus illicitly ordained by him.

Later the same Prelate requested and obtained absolution from the excommunication most specially reserved to the Holy See which he had incurred.

It has now come to the knowledge of this Sacred Congregation that His Excellency Mons. Ngô-dinh-Thuc, since the year 1981, has again ordained other priests contrary to the terms of canon 955. Moreover, what is still more serious, in the same year, disregarding canon 953, without pontifical mandate and canonical provision, he conferred episcopal ordination on the religious priest, M.-L. Guérard des Lauriers, O.P., of France, and on the priests Moises Carmona and Adolfo Zamora, of Mexican origin. Subsequently Moises Carmona in his turn conferred episcopal ordination on the Mexican priests Benigno Bravo and Roberto Martínez, and also on the American priest George Musey.

Moreover, His Excellency Ngô-dinh-Thuc wished to prove the legitimacy of his actions especially by the public declaration made by him in Munich on 25 February 1982 in which he asserted that "the See of the Catholic Church at Rome was vacant" and therefore he as a bishop "was doing everything so that the Catholic Church of Rome would continue for the eternal salvation of souls".

After duly pondering the seriousness of these crimes and erroneous assertions, the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, by special mandate of His Holiness Pope John Paul II, deems it necessary to renew the prescripts of its decree of 17 September 1976, which in this case is applied fully, namely.

1) Bishops who ordained other bishops, as well as the bishops ordained, besides the sanctions mentioned in canons 2370 and 2373, 1 and 3, of the Code of Canon Law, incurred also, ipso facto, excommunication most specially reserved to the Apostolic See as stated in the Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office of 9 April 1951 (AAS XLIII, 1951, p. 217 f.) The penalty contained in canon 2370 applies also to assisting priests, should any have been present.

2) In accordance with canon 2374 priests illicitly ordained in this way are ipso facto suspended from the order received, and they are also irregular should they exercise the order (canon 985, 7).

3) Finally, as regards those who have already received ordination in this illicit manner, or who will perhaps receive ordination from them, whatever about the validity of the orders, the Church does not nor shall it recognize their ordination, and as regards all juridical effects, it considers them in the state which each one had previously, and the above-mentioned penal sanctions remain in forceuntil repentance.

Moreover, this Sacred Congregation deems it its duly earnestly to warn the faithful not to take part in or support in any way liturgical activities or initiatives and works of another kind which are promoted by those mentioned above (1).

[/quot





Wow.

Leaving out all the rest of this post, #3 is news to me!

Rome recognizes the validity of these episcopal consecrations as illicit (and therefore valid), but does not recognize the validity of Thuc bishops' priestly ordinations?

Do I have this right?

Quote from: Sean Johnson

Rome recognizes the validity of these episcopal consecrations as illicit (and therefore valid), but does not recognize the validity of Thuc bishops' priestly ordinations?

Those would be very bad news for the CMRI, indeed.

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: Sean Johnson

Rome recognizes the validity of these episcopal consecrations as illicit (and therefore valid), but does not recognize the validity of Thuc bishops' priestly ordinations?

Those would be very bad news for the CMRI, indeed.

Indeed it would - if the CMRI cared what "Rome" thinks.