...If you condemn Francis as “heretical pope” one must break communion with him. This is why I called the doc “practically sedevacantist”. It’s not formally sede but the natural conclusion is...First off, according to one of its authors, the 'heresy letter' did not "condemn" Francis; it asked Bishops to force a clarification of Francis' ambiguous writings, which writings COULD be heretical. Here is the pertinent citation:
...I would like to distinguish between the accusation of heresy, and the formal declaration of someone being a heretic by the competent authority: the accusation of being a heretic is one thing, the sentence that formally declares him such is another, and that it is not up to us to issue, but precisely to the bishops to whom we have addressed the open letter....
Obviously, the INTENTION of the writers is not "sede," thus it is not a "natural conclusion" to go there. (Yes, SSPX is beating a certain drum. So what?)
Keep your powder dry, Taylor. The fat lady hasn't even warmed up.