Exchanges On The Stupidity Of Sanborn’s Position

Exchanges On The Stupidity Of Sanborn’s Position

You are incorrect. Their position that the V2 Sect's 'cardinals' are true cardinals is a key aspect of 'the Thesis'. They don't like to mention it that much because they are dishonest deceivers who like to gain followers and supporters from actual sedevacantists. It's covered and documented, from their own words, around 7:10 and following of this video: Sanborn And Others Are Totally Wrong On Manifest Heresy – New Evidence From Pope Martin V).

Since they regard the apostate Bergoglio to be a true cardinal, they necessarily hold him to be a Catholic and a member of the Church (which is preposterous nonsense). Their position is also schismatic because they reject communion with the man (Bergoglio) who is recognized as the pope by all of their 'Catholic cardinals', and they refuse to say that he's a public heretic. In truth, they are (with some variation) basically a more hardline version of the SSPX (also adhering to the same blatant heresy against EENS). They have lots of externals but not the Catholic faith. They also have no permission to do what they are doing, and they do not represent the Catholic Church in any way.

Your attempted summary of their false position just further illustrates its incoherence and striking inconsistency. When they say that Francis is Catholic "before the Church" (coram ecclesia), that means that he's not a manifest heretic (since manifest heretics have no union coram ecclesia or coram Deo). The idea that Francis is not a manifest heretic is nonsense and contrary to Catholic teaching. Moreover, if they say that he's a heretic before God (coram Deo), they could only make that determination based on what he displays "before the Church" (coram ecclesia - in the external forum and publicly); but that would require them to say that he's a heretic in the sight of the Church. They also say that he publicly imposes a false religion "on the whole Church", yet that he's Catholic "before the Church". That, of course, makes no sense whatsoever; for someone who publicly imposes a false religion "on the whole Church" (as they say) is of course a public adherent of a false religion and therefore a manifest heretic. If you cannot see that their position is contradictory, then you have a big problem. Further, a cardinal by definition is a member of the Church. So, when they say that Bergoglio is a true Catholic cardinal, they are acknowledging him to be publicly Catholic (which is blasphemy). You should stop defending heretics (like Sanborn's non-Catholic group) and embrace the truth.