Despite the fact that Tradition In Action @ TraditionInAction.org rejects the position of sedevacantism, they put out a lot a good material in support of it. Twice, I’ve written open letters to Tradition in Action. [2] However, they continue to suffer from the The Anti-Sedevacantist Syndrome.
Recently, TIA responded to the Brazilian priest claiming he attacked them. [1] The priest wrote:
“TIA, How can you say that the Church teaches heresies and the Pope has a diabolical sense? If we see that, we can conclude that this is not the Church and Francis isn’t a true Pope!”
The priest makes the point that it’s not just the Vatican 2 popes but the Church, which TIA claims is teaching heresy.
TIA’s reply is astounding. They admit that their religion, which they believe is the Catholic Church, teaches the heresy of universal salvation. They write:
“Now then, all the Conciliar Popes preached universal salvation, especially Pope Francis. So, it is accurate to say that they are heretics…”
Next, TIA denies the logical conclusion that a heretic can’t be pope by stating, “History registers several Popes that taught heresy and continued to be Popes.” They provide two links to prove their point, but they prove no such thing.
Never has a pope taught heresy. The First Vatican Council’s fathers make that abundantly clear after pointing to 40 papal errors of the past. Popes can err, but not against the Faith. However, Atila Sinke Guimarãess of TIA claims in one article that Honorius was a heretic.
The Fathers of the First Vatican Council certainly didn’t think Honorius was heretic and neither did St. Robert Bellarmine. Honorius made it clear that he had no intention to define a doctrine. His letters were private and weren’t published until years later. His successor Pope John IV defended the orthodoxy of Honorius. Pope St. Leo II did not condemn Honorius for heresy, but for tolerating it. Much of the Honorius incident is unclear and doubtful. Yet, TIA needs Honorius to be a formal heretic in order to justify that popes can be heretics and remain popes. [3]
The main problem for TIA is that the First Vatican Council has infallibly declared by implication that popes can’t be heretics and remain popes. Thus the discussion is closed despite TIA saying the contrary. Furthermore, by claiming their popes are heretics, they necessarily must conclude that the gates of hell are also the gates of the Church. These are two huge problems when you decide that your popes can also be heretics.
TIA asserts that the Catholic Church teaches heresy and promulgates an evil liturgy. As I’ve said before, if the Catholic Church can promulgate such things, it would be the height of hypocrisy for the same Church to condemn Protestantism for doing the same. Did Christ found a Church that’s all true or mostly true? TIA advocates the latter.
TIA make themselves out to be stalwart supporters of traditional Catholicism, but they are every bit as revolutionary as those they condemn.
Footnotes:
[1] OPEN LETTER TO “TRADITION IN ACTION”
Open Letter to Fr. Ronald Brown of Tradition in Action
[2] TIA’s Film Has Wrong Affirmations & Biased Data (traditioninaction.org)
[3] For the sake of the argument, if Honorius indeed fell into heresy, it doesn’t prove he kept the papacy afterwards.
Speray's Catholicism in a Nutshell 
For these pseudo-traditionalists, it is absurd that the Church remains without a pope for decades, which is why they prefer to have a “heretical pope” rather than to be sedevacantists. There is no worse blind man than one who refuses to see.
TIA Where’s the reality if you try to prove something you don’t even believe? Sedes don’t have to prove anything. Why? because they believe what is real.