[Loyalist]

We do not share in the slightest the position of those who consider the See of Peter vacant, nor of those who want to attribute to others the indivisible responsibility of the Petrine munus.

This sentence is a powerful statement of a serious development in the minds of high-ranking clergy. Sedevacantism and its variants have been the domain of fringe traditionalists who have been given not a whit of notice in the Church. That the theory has had to be denied in the dubia indicates that it has come to merit serious consideration.

[Antoninus]

This sentence is a powerful statement of a serious development in the minds of high-ranking clergy. Sedevacantism and its variants have been the domain of fringe traditionalists who have been given not a whit of notice in the Church. That the theory has had to be denied in the dubia indicates that it has come to merit serious consideration.

Agree. This has the sound of a Ciceronian argument. Why mention the accusation at all if it has no merit?

[piusv]

It is also interesting that this statement does not condemn the positions they do not share even though there are many who wish to condemn them and those who hold them (whether strict sedevacantism or those who believe Benedict is the true pope).

I would argue that although they do not currently share the position, it is very possible that they have mentioned it because they too have considered it. It is also possible that they could agree with it in the future.