Re: Objection rased by Anti-Una Cum sedes
"Presuming one thinks it acceptable for a sedevacantist to assist at Mass offered una cum BXVI, upon what principles would a sedevacantist be forbidden to assist at a Mass offered una cum one of the other 'pretender Popes'?"
What would be the proper answer to this question?
Do you mean one of the other present
claimants? The ones with five, ten, or fifty adherents?
Oh dear. I think this is an excellent illustration of the lack of judgement out there, Ben. Are you seriously suggesting that a non-adherent of one of those nuts is in a position where the only Mass he can assist at is offered by a priest who thinks that one of them is truly the pope? I didn't know any of them had priests, other than Palmar. Anyway, the very fact that your correspondents cannot distinguish the two cases tells you to proceeed slowly. They're obviously not very bright.
I believe that the principles in my article discussing this question apply to all cases. So, let's see what the reasons are which would militate against assistance at such a Mass.
First, it is difficult to imagine that one could find oneself in a place where the only Mass was one offered by an adherent of one of those pretenders, so the need to assist at such a Mass would seem to be illusory.
Second, in those cases you mention I would think that you have schismatic sects. One cannot worship with non-Catholics.
Third, if you judge that they are not yet schismatic sects, then you have a problem avoiding scandal. The lack of necessity would in itself be a problem on this score, but not the only one.
Anyway, those are my off-the-cuff thoughts on it. You've made my morning.