What about Bp. Sanborn’s Sedeprivationism? I do not thoroughly understand it, but what I do grasp of it is sort of a middle ground between R & R and absolute Sedevacantism. The only thing that concerns me is that I’ve yet to see a string basis in Tradition or Scripture.
I’m not #3, neither able to support the heresies of the Conciliar Church, the novus ordo, nor am I the blind follower of a vagus guru, a cult of personality. I have read dozens of books, but I certainly don’t consider myself an ecclesiastical scholar!
I unfortunately see a parallel between a few devoted followers of Archbishop LeFebvre (May he Rest In Peace) and the more fanatical members of Chabad, (the 770 tunnelers!), who are still awaiting their deceased Rebbe, Menachem Schneerson, to rise bodily from his grave in Queens, NY and proclaim himself the Moschiach.
Why does it matter?
The resistance distances itself from Rome anyway.
Many who proclaim loyalty ignore certain important things he said and did.
He wasn't sede BUT he did not dismiss it the way Bishop Aquinas did.
And fyi, bishop Williamson saw bishop vigano frequently even AFTER he conditionally consecrated him
Topic: SAJM leaves the resistance??? (Apostles of Jesus and Mary) (Read 1625 times)