I never said you did. Perhaps thou dost protest too much...
Oh well, we can count on Williamson as a continuing icon of schism. Does his nibs also believe that the Holocaust never occurred? Do you? That the earth is flat? Do you?
I personally don't speak for Bishop Williamson, nor do I, by the way, go to the SSPX for Mass. I might, though, if they are regularized as I believe they will be. And, it is not my role nor authority to suggest, as you do, that Catholics "run a gaunlet." You also participate in name calling, such as calling me a "schizzy" when you have no position to judge who is and who isn't. You don't know me.
Oh, and the earth is round. Haven't you seen the NASA pictures?
The bad news is that adhering to the schism (quite a different matter from mere Mass attendance), will merit you excommunication under Ecclesia Dei. Dare I say that defending the SSPX schism is describable as adhering more so than attending Mass? Yes, I dare.
Have you any defenses of the 16th century reformation other than its sassy anti-papal style?
I never asked that Catholics run a gauntlet. I did express the hope that His Holiness will make SSPX SCHIZZIES seeking readmission to the Roman Catholic Church run the gauntlet and subject them to the full measure of public repentance, sorrow and recantation and humiliation before readmitting them to the Church. If burning at the stake were still an option, I would suggest it but, realistically, running the gauntlet will do. The Roman Catholic Church is, well, the Roman Catholic Church and it is not some sophomoric college debating society.
I well understand that the world is somewhat, well, global, and not flat. The question is as to those who imagine that Pope St. Pius V in Quo Primum did not exceed even papal authority by purporting to bind each and every successor in perpetuity as to a disciplinary matter rather than as to doctrinal matters. The precise rubrics of the Tridentine Mass of Pope St. Pius V were apparently regarded by him as a method of avoiding "reformation" of the Roman Catholic Church. That was the challenge obviously posed in his time and his method for fighting the problem of creepin reformationism. Other methods might well occur to other subsequent popes and to deprive successor popes of the power of the keys as to the mere form of the liturgy.
In the Mass of Pope St. Pius V, we pray for the pope and our respective DIOCESAN bishops. Now, if someone added Fellay and his fellow excommunicati (none of whom by anyone's claim are DIOCESAN bishops) to those for whom prayers are offered in the Mass, such an addition would obviously change the rubric without papal permission to do so. Will Williamson incur double secret excommunication in addition to his pre-existing excommunication (Ecclesia Dei, 1988) if he adds Fellay to those for whom rayers are offered in the Canon of the Mass? I am not a scholar of these matters but I understand that Pope St. Pius V himself allowed the Ambrosian Rite of the Dominicans to survive. The Ambrsian Rite is NOT the Tridentine of Pope St. Pius V however similar. Did Pope St. Pius V excommunicate himself by allowing the Ambrosian Rite or any other rubric than te precise Tridentine? If you take the ultra vires (beyond PPV powers) excommunications and anathemas launched by PPV before any changes were made, how many of our popes are excommunicated starting with Pope St. Pius V?
This entire Quo Primum business brings the papacy and the Church into disrepute to the extent that anyone buys gullibly into the SSPX party line on this (or anything else?????). It reduces the Roman Catholic Church to the level of a Young Republican credentials fight with dubious "standards" indeed.
You are what you post. You may imagine that you have the right to define yourself with disagreement from no one else just because you say so. If so, you are wrong. This is the methodology of "identity politics. In Hillary's case or Marcel's, it amounts to: "I am deluded, therefore I am what I say I am." There is objective truth whatever Marcel and Ms. Hillary may imagine.
I strongly recommend to you a thrteen year-old book by Dick Cheney's wife Lynn. It is "Telling the Truth." The Arkansas Antichrist and Mrs. Antichrist want no one to read that book. Likewise, though it is not a religious book, as such, SSPX hopes you ignore the book as well for reasons that will be obvious when you have read it, if you have read it.
If you express support for SSPX and its schism, you can hardly object to being described as a schizzie.