[SGNA]

Notable from Mario's essay:

But, no matter. For Barnhardt, Benedict XVI is a valid Pope because he is a heretic, that is, he espouses a heretical concept of the papacy (she does not say it is heretical, but it is). If that isn’t putting everything upside down, similar to what Francis just did as he declared marriage to be fornication and fornication to be marriage, it is hard to imagine what would be.

So, if anything, Barnhardt ought to conclude that Benedict XVI cannot be Pope because he holds to a heretical concept of the papacy. Instead, she has persuaded herself that this heresy is not what makes his election or continued putative papacy invalid, but his resignation! This is absurdity on stilts!

Barnhardt says that “Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger’s ontology is CLEARLY warped”, but hers is no less so: She believes a man who professes heresy against the papacy is Pope precisely because of that heresy, which rendered his resignation invalid.

[SunLakesJeff]

This will ultimately unfold on its own. VC2 was a reaction to the ineffective VC1, which was an ineffective reaction to the, um, Protestant Reformation. Bringing up Traditionalism to my existing clergy, indeed, resulted in defensiveness and a little bit, frankly, of Projection ("THEY are the rebels!").

Thankfully, I remain in Communion. But I am being self-serving. My praise is done in my home, and I hate that.