False statement. This pope is rejecting what he has been commissioned to do in his office. He has even rejected the title of "Vicar of Christ".
Connect the dots. If he's not Christ's vicar, who's vicar is he?
Who’s Vicar???
There’s Your Circular Logic!
Was this Pope elected by the world’s Catholic Cardinals to be the official, only leader of the Catholic church on Earth?
If so, you are grossly wrong to say he wasn’t. To think the world’s Cardinals elected him in err is to say all of those who elected him, and the Pope himself, are evil.
In essence, you are saying the Catholic church is led by Satan and his henchmen.
So, you DO think this pope is the vicar of Christ on the earth after all.
After all, he holds the office, the title, and was elected by the College of Cardinals according to Catholic protocol. That makes him the de facto legitimate pope, the guy you condemn and criticize constantly on this forum.
Not being in submission or subjection to him is dangerous for your eternal fate according to Unum Sanctum, which I don't recall has ever been rescinded.
'Since you reject the only living duly elected pope and disent from V2 the novus ordo church (The Catholic Church has already shut itself up since VCII. The Church no longer proclaims, Christ, the Sovereign King, to all nations; nor does it preach, "extra Ecclesiam nulla salus"' - 31; "You may want to give VCII a pass; but I will never do so." 20 , then in essence you are acting like traditional evangelical Bible Christians are to do as regards determining what is true teaching.
Meaning that the latter are to examine what is taught by examination of its comport with valid church teaching, which TradCaths also do, and with divisions among both, with the division btwn traditional evangelical Bible Christians and TradCaths being that the latter look to what they selectively choose as being past teaching, while the former are to look to the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels) in which .distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest.
If submission and unity itself is the goal, then submission such as required by many past popes is what TradCaths do not example:
'the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors," "to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff," "of submitting with docility to their judgment," with "no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed... not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ;" and 'not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority, " for "obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces," and not set up "some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them," "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent." (Sources http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3578348/posts?page=14#14)