Matthew announced it would no longer be permissible for sede-somethings to declare Archbishop Lefeebvre's R&R position heretical on this (allegedly) R&R forum.
Making that allegation was to result in a ban.
Then a slight retracing of steps: "Well, it will depend on that person's posting history."
OK, let's test the new rule:
Yesterday, while the sedes were all rallying each other NOT to answer a very simple question ("Do you consider the R&R position to be against the faith?"), and miraculously abstaining from even entering into the conversation, so as not to unduly tempt themselves into giving the answer they are dying to give, the sedes behind the scenes were all trying to formulate a strategy to these new CI conditions:
"How can we still be crusading sedes at war with R&R on CI? Above all, we must not lose CI, so be very careful (as Jaynek continuously warned them all)!"
Ladislaus was the first (and only one) to run a test flight:
"I consider some propositions held by certain R&R to be against the faith."
Reaction from Matthew? Nothing.
Not even 12 hours into the new rule, it is already being bypassed and ignored.
Whether Matthew does not want to be seen as being influenced by Sean Johnson, or whether the shrinking numbers represented by a mass-sede defection are sinking in, I cannot say (though those all-important numbers would easily be replaced by the R&R defections which have been bleeding from this forum for years).
Perhaps it was Ladislaus' fictitious (and to date, unheard of novel qualification): "But just as there are 100 flavors of sedevacantism, so too there are 100 flavors of R&R."
Asked to give an example of even one of those other alleged "flavors," a strange silence prevails.
Nobody has ever heard of "variants" of R&R as exist in the ever-deteriorating and fragmenting sede orb.
At present, the sedes are all formulating how to fabricate precisely such "variants" of R&R.
But it will all be a fictitious attempt to preserve their opposition to R&R on CI:
There is only 1 version of R&R, and it was Archbishop Lefebvre's version: The only version that has ever animated the SSPX and Resistance: We recognize the pope, but reject his errors.
There is no other version of R&R, which proves Ladislaus was merely "buzzing the tower" to see if he (and sedes generally) could continue their war on R&R from this new, fictitious perspective:
Oh, we love ABL's R&R, just not (whose ??) R&R.
So, I am looking for either a retraction from Ladislaus, or a ban of him from Matthew.
Failure to obtain one or the other is precisely what the sedes await: If the rule is toothless, well...