Bishop Williamson:

so the Schism lasted only 39 years.

ONLY 39 years ... just a trifle.

Of course, if you're a Siri theorist like myself, we're ONLY on year 35 since the death of Pope Gregory XVIII in 1989. 

Bishop Williamson also does not address the sedeprivationist position, which doesn't labor under these criticisms, nor the position of his own Fr. Chazal, one which is for all practical intents and purposes identical to that of sedeprivationism.

AND, Bishop Williamson simply ingores, and doesn't even address, the main problem of the SVs.  OK, his contention is that the Church cannot function without ordinary jurisdiction (appointments, etc.) ... and yet somehow he's functioned for all these years without such ... but the Church CAN function when there's a free-for-all in terms of interpreting Tradition?  OK, we have a clown (or two clowns at one point) running around Rome in white cassocks?  So the Church CAN properly function when the Popes are spewing heresy, punishing actual Catholics, and promoting heretics?

If the lack of a visible hierarchy (to which of course they only pay lip service ... "Yep, your'e valid.", but then do nothing consistent with their being said hierarchy -- in fact, the Resistance CRITICIZE the SSPX for attempting to work with said valid/legitimate hierarchy) causes problems for the Church, how about when the visible hierarchy is so badly undermining the Catholic faith and the public worship of the Church so as to make refusing submission to and communion with such a hierarchy not only permissible but even required, in ordert o keep the faith?  That doesn't cause problems?  What, then, is the point of having such a hierarchy?  Answer:  absolutely nothing.  We'd be better off without it.  So, Lord, this "rock" upon which you founded your Church ... well, thanks, but no thanks.

People can intend to be, think they are, and desire to be 100% for the truth and still fall into error.

If the laity has the ability to know 100% what Truth is, then why would a Pope even be necessary?

Agreed. I like the way Fr. Wathen considers it....

"...So, what is so burdensome about all this (pope's duties)? Who, it might be asked, has an easier assignment? Everything has been instituted with incomparable wisdom. After almost two thousand years, the Church has developed into an organization of excellent structure. The doctrine is certain; the moral code is incontrovertible in the main; the divine liturgy has been (had been) refined to a perfection; the code of laws worked. In a word, the spiritual doctrine, the tradition, the authority, the experience, the customs, the supernatural objectives all have been established. With a little prudence and a little caution on the part of the pope, Holy Church will practically run itself..."

I’m not even sure if Ratzinger was a valid pope, except in name only. 

But I’m 100% sure that “Benedict” resigned in the way he did, to sow discord and confusion, like the heretic Modernist that he is.  

So was Benedict the pope until his death?  Or is Francis the pope now?  Who cares, because they are both Modernist. 

Whether we have a temporal-only, Modernist pope or no pope at all - practically speaking, it makes no difference, because either way, the Church is without a true Shepherd.  Bad pope or no pope - the end result is chaos, either way.  

I keep forgetting only sedes go to Heaven.
 

Thank you Johannes for illuminating us little people who belong to a false religion. I am truly blessed for your wisdom and of course your humility,  God does really need you to spread His truth.    

First, as St Augustine observes, The prophets spoke more plainly and openly of the church than of Christ, foreseeing that on this a much greater number may err and be deceived than on the mystery of the Incarnation. For in after ages there would not be wanting wicked men who, like an ape would fain to pass for a man, would claim that THEY ALONE WERE CATHOLICS, AND WITH NO LESS IMPIETY THAN EFFRONTERY ASSERT THAT WITH THEM ALONE IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

Trent!

Does this sound like Johannes?

“Sede-vacantism” is a magical, talismanic word not unlike “anti-semitism”.

For you see, the deadliest modern sin is to believe the Church was infiltrated & hijacked by ʝʊdɛօ-masons who implemented an internal schism against Roman Catholicism.

This is why the SSPX’s duplicitous philosophy of “Recognize & Resist” has de-masculinated a good portion of remnant Catholics.

And if you pay close attention to the “funded” trad Marrano media, you’ll understand that they are also attacking the sedes.

Why?  Because ultimately, discounting the post 1958 fake popes and refusing to dialogue with the schism is “end game” for them.

“Them” is the controlled opposition, just another tentacle of the Revolution.

As something of a sede myself I think there is a much bigger issue than the Pope question, and that is the dogma of EENS being repeatedly denied by all trad groups 'officially'. (By 'group' I am only counting those with Priests/Bishops)

The sede groups deny Vatican 2, but at the same time accept a docuмent that vatican 2 uses to teach salvation outside the Church because that same docuмent was used against Fr Feeney. 

The SSPX is more CONSISTENT in this manner. Because they accept vatican 2.

Somehow non-Catholics can actually be members of the Church without being members of the Body of Christ and can be saved outside the Church in some "exceptions". This is why 'Pope Francis' believes that all paths lead to God, he is simply being consistent with vatican 2. 

Consistency is very important, it's why the SSPX's position on the new rites bothers me. If the Anglican rite and the Novus Ordo rite of ordination have the same problems, yet the Church already decreed the Anglican rite utterly null and void, then we should hold the Novus Ordo rite to the same standard.


A deceitful balance is an abomination before the Lord: and a just weight is his will.
[Proverbs 11:1]

Weight and balance are judgments of the Lord: and his work all the weights of the bag.
[Proverbs 16:11]

Diverse weights and diverse measures, both are abominable before God.
[Proverbs 20:10]

Diverse weights are an abomination before the Lord: a deceitful balance is not good.
[Proverbs 20:23]

Ultimately I cannot say that I have the same faith as the person who is supposed to be the Pope, this is a problem.

If he is in heresy, schism or apostasy then he would be automatically outside the Church as per Pope Pius 12th.
Did he not also make heretical statements in his works before he became 'Pope', same as Ratzinger?
If he doesn't have the Catholic faith how is he a member of the Church?
If he isn't Catholic then how can he be the Pope?
Can someone who isn't even a priest let alone a bishop be the Pope?