Response to Bp. Williamson on the Vacancy of the Roman See by Most Reverend Donald J. Sanborn
Bishop Williamson has recently placed on his Kyrie Eleison blog a series of articles attempting to refute sedevacantism. Having attracted to himself the staunchest antimodernists in the SSPX, Bishop Williamson, I believe, is finding among them a certain tendency toward sedevacantism. Some of them are professed sedevacantists, although opinionists in most cases. This means that while they think that Bergoglio is not the pope, they recognize that the opposite opinion, that Bergoglio is the pope, has some probable arguments in its favor. I am sure my visit to England recently stirred things up a bit as well.
In this article, I am responding to two of Bishop Williamson’s blog articles, numbers 343 of February 8th, 2014, and 344 of February 14th, 2014.
Let me state that I have no personal conflict with Bishop Williamson, despite our many years of opposition in the past. He has kept the discussion on a high and rational level, and I intend to do the same.
Bishop Williamson has recently placed on his Kyrie Eleison blog a series of articles attempting to refute sedevacantism. Having attracted to himself the staunchest antimodernists in the SSPX, Bishop Williamson, I believe, is finding among them a certain tendency toward sedevacantism. Some of them are professed sedevacantists, although opinionists in most cases. This means that while they think that Bergoglio is not the pope, they recognize that the opposite opinion, that Bergoglio is the pope, has some probable arguments in its favor. I am sure my visit to England recently stirred things up a bit as well.
In this article, I am responding to two of Bishop Williamson’s blog articles, numbers 343 of February 8th, 2014, and 344 of February 14th, 2014.
Let me state that I have no personal conflict with Bishop Williamson, despite our many years of opposition in the past. He has kept the discussion on a high and rational level, and I intend to do the same.
Bishop Williamson has recently placed on his Kyrie Eleison blog a series of articles attempting to refute sedevacantism. Having attracted to himself the staunchest antimodernists in the SSPX, Bishop Williamson, I believe, is finding among them a certain tendency toward sedevacantism. Some of them are professed sedevacantists, although opinionists in most cases. This means that while they think that Bergoglio is not the pope, they recognize that the opposite opinion, that Bergoglio is the pope, has some probable arguments in its favor. I am sure my visit to England recently stirred things up a bit as well.
In this article, I am responding to two of Bishop Williamson’s blog articles, numbers 343 of February 8th, 2014, and 344 of February 14th, 2014.
Let me state that I have no personal conflict with Bishop Williamson, despite our many years of opposition in the past. He has kept the discussion on a high and rational level, and I intend to do the same.