Thank you for providing this. The writer of the article is obviously biased which already diminishes credibility, and to my surprise accuses the aforementioned clergy ordained by +Thuc of being heretics. From their point of view that JP2 was the Pope, it would make sense to call them schismatic, but heretics? What is the heresy they are guilty of? Absolutely ridiculous. I am not going to take some random, biased journalist's word for it.
Anybody who attends a thuc line, or is a thuc line clergy is the one who is biased.
The Angelus is not "some random" journalist. They would not have printed this without some source to back it up.
I think you are letting your own bias shine through, while having put on a good act for a while.
Because an impartial person reading this would realize that there already was a perfectly good line namely that of Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Castro de Mayer. The only problem for some is that they were not foaming-at-the-mouth sedevacantists. So an impartial person would not feel the need to defend Thuc line at all costs, and can suspend any attachment to it. And look at this question reasonably.
One of the reasons I know I will always win this argument in the eyes of reasonable people is that dogmatic sedes can almost never resist getting extremely emotional, insulting, over bearing and downright childish when you discuss this question in depth.
It's almost as if... Gee... They're trying to hide something...
Topic: Permanent Chapel in Alberta, Canada (Read 3712 times)