Please understand that, in response to your post #41, I was merely pointing out that whether or not you (or anyone else, for that matter) "respects" the points made by other posters is hardly apropos to a factual discussion regarding Church doctrine.
On the contrary, a number of non-sedes have used their private judgment to judge that I and other sedevacantists are not Catholic and are out of the Church.
"Private judgment" has no bearing on the matter. It is the sedevacantists themselves who publicly reject the post-1958 Church. And it is they who publish books and blogs referring to those who remain in the Church post-Vatican II as "catholics" with a small "c", "popes", etc. and host radio shows featuring snarky clerics cackling mockingly at those who remain in the Church. Anyone who spends a minimal amount of time perusing sedevacantist media can see this for themselves. It comes off as very disingenuous to identify as a sedevacantist while making the claim that sedevantists don't judge, when their media openly judges and ridicules faithful Catholics (including faithful, holy priests) who remain on the Ark. The facts speak for themselves.
Pius, we have wildly digressed from the OP. Would not want to irritate the "Bear". Time to agree to disagree.
Pax.
I am certainly not going to just "agree to disagree" with you that I am not Catholic. By telling me that in so many words, you have made it personal whether you wish to admit it or not.
The dogmatic sedevacantists are wrong (those who believe that non-sedes are not Catholic). And those of you who are dogmatic sedeplenists (those who believe sedes are non-Catholic) are equally as wrong. Based on your posts you appear to be a dogmatic sedeplenist.