I know a thread like this could get heated, so I just want to state from the outset that I’m honestly looking for answers, so I feel I need the ask the question:
Those groups of traditionalists who find themselves justified in maintaining “imperfect communion” of various degrees with Rome seem to argue that they must do this because it would be sinful to obey what Roman authority, i.e. popes, have commanded. Now, I understand and grant the point that if a prelate, even the pope himself, commands something that is contrary to faith and morals he must be disobeyed. My question is, though, what has this pope, Benedict, or previous popes commanded that
- is immoral and thus must be disobeyed and
- has been placed as a condition of communion such that maintaining full communion with the Holy See is impossible while disobeying this order?
I feel the need to ask the question because I can’t think of what the answer might be. I recognize that many point to the crisis in today’s Church as the justifying factor, yet of all the silly and outright pernicious things that happen - even if you think the popes have been perpetrators of outright evil - I’m not sure what immoral thing has actually been mandated and I would like to know what it is supposed to be. That would make it much easier to assess the merits of the case for “imperfect communion.” Thanks to all for their answers, and please, PLEASE, let’s everyone be charitable in debating the proposals.