Neither Bp. Williamson or Archbishop Lefebvre ever referred to themselves as being "sede" anything. They don't think, and didn't think, in those terms. They are Catholic. They have no interest, that I know of, in defining themselves into sub-groups, like the Protestants do.
So....not being absolutely certain means that they were probably sede-somethings, in your view?
Why such a great interest on the part of the sedes and sedewhatevers to remake +ABL, +W (and even Fr. Chazal) into something that they clearly are not? It's dishonest. I mean, it's a main focus on this forum to remake +ABL and the Resistance clergy into sede-somethings. It reminds me of the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ agenda, where the homos try to insist that someone is 'gαy' even when they have not said so. And the homos especially like to insist that certain deceased people were ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, when it was unlikely that they were. Same type of agenda with the sedewhatevers.
It causes me to wonder if sedevacantism and sedewhateverism is intrinsically disordered, since they seem to suffer from the same type need to deceive as the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs do.
Ladislaus explained it correctly. To not use the sede term, I think lefebvre thought, and Williamson thinks, that the conciliar popes are most likely popes. But they also think the Church might eventually tell us they weren’t popes.
Topic: Bishop Williamson sermon from High Mass - recent conference Fr. Calderon's book (Read 2386 times)