Consider the following list of colorful characters:
- An illiterate chicken farmer who loses both eyes in a car accident
- A man rejected by Traditionalist seminaries, has never held a real job, has no formal education above high school and lives in a farm house with his mother
- A Dominican priest ordained in 1958, who claims God revealed to him that the form of Baptism was wrong since the first century and he was correctly baptized by an angel from heaven
- A 38 year old "self-educated" expert in many alleged fields of knowledge with serious medical issues
It is alleged that sedevacantism leads to this kind of insanity. The SSPX put out a book entitled Sedevacantism: A False Solution to a Real Problem, in which they make the same attempt to discredit the idea that there is a vacancy of the Holy See by citing to the various independent bishops spuriously consecrated on a whim and alleged "popes." While it is true that sedevacantism is a necessary presupposition of these papal claimants (why attempt to fill a position if you already have a pope?); to say that it is also necessary that conclavism and mysticalists must follow is a non sequitur. It is the fallacy of affirming the consequent.
Major Premise: If X is a conclavist pope, he is a sedevacantist.
Minor Premise: X is a sedevacantist
Conclusion: X is a conclavist pope.
This is a fallacy. Consider:
Major premise: If X is a cat, it is an animal
Minor Premise: X is an animal
Conclusion: X is a cat.
As far as some dubious or unworthy Traditionalist bishops consecrated under a time of near universal apostasy, remember the words of Our Lord: "Then Jesus told them, "This very night you will all fall away on account of me, for it is written: "'I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.'" (St. Matthew 26: 31). Without a pope, the Vicar of Christ, this is what will happen from time to time as we have no shepherd to guide us. Compare this to the Vatican II sect which allegedly has a pope (Frankie-Bergoglio), yet has less unity and more scandal than anyone.
The frauds of the conclavist/mysticalist movement can be spotted in their own heretical positions and/or absurd situations. "Pope" Michael (David Bawden, claiming papacy since 1990) was "elected" by six people; his parents, himself and three neighbors who were "the only viable Catholics remaining in the world." He lives at home with his mother on the farm. He claims to have been ordained and consecrated a bishop, but he refuses to name the alleged bishop who ordained and consecrated him. There is a documentary on his sad life you can view on YouTube.
The "Palmarian Catholic Church" started by one Clemente Dominguez, claimed to have been "mystically crowned pope by Jesus Christ" upon the death of Paul VI, who was an imprisoned "martyr and saint" within the Vatican. An impostor took his place in public. Taking the name "Gregory XVII", he lost his eyes in a car accident. He was actually able to convince Archbishop Thuc to ordain and consecrate himself and five others in 1976, but Thuc repented for having been duped. Further, as an illiterate chicken farmer, he is canonically unfit (as were the other five), so there is no presumption of validity in any sacraments they confer. All their "clergy" are dubious. Add to this the revelation after he died that he engaged in sex with several of his so-called nuns, and it's obvious this is not from God. The heresy of his "Palmarian Council" stated that Mary shall be called the "Irredeemed" because she who had no sin did not need redemption! This contradicts the constant teaching of the Church, including the infallible decree of Pope Pius IX Ineffabilis Deus, proclaiming the Immaculate Conception. It states that Mary WAS redeemed "in view of the merits of Jesus Christ", hence in a unique way, but redeemed nevertheless. They are on their third antipope, "Gregory XVIII."
Conclavism/Mysticalism is started by the deluded, charlatans looking to make money and feel important, and those who have big egos and are ignorant of theology. This is not a post-Vatican II phenomenon.
Consider the following under Pope Pius XII:
"Frenchman Michel Collin or Colin, born in a village of Lorraine in 1905 and ordained a priest in 1935, announced in 1936 that he had been ordained a bishop by Christ himself. He founded a community called the Order of the Mother of God (a name later changed to "Apostles of Infinite Love"), in response to the 1846 request made by the Blessed Virgin Mary, as reported later by Mélanie Calvat, one of the seers of La Salette. In 1950 he announced that he had been crowned Pope and had taken the name Clement XV. Pope Pius XII laicized him in 1951and publicly declared him, by name, a vitandus (one who should be avoided) excommunicate." (See, e.g., Smoke of Satan by Michael Cuneo, also in wikipedia; emphasis mine).
How then do we get a real pope? As Fr. Cekada has written:
IF THE POST-VATICAN II popes are not true popes, how might the
Church one day get a true pope again? Here are some theories:
1. Direct Divine Intervention. This scenario is found in the writings
of some approved mystics.
2. The Material/Formal Thesis. This holds that should a post-
Vatican II pope publicly renounce the heresies of the post-
Conciliar Church, he would automatically become a true pope.
3. An Imperfect General Council. The theologian Cajetan (1469–
1534) and others teach that, should the College of Cardinals become
extinct, the right to elect a pope would devolve to the
clergy of Rome, and then to the universal Church. (de Comparatione
13, 742, 745)
Each of these seems to present some difficulties. But this
should not be surprising, because the precise solution to an unusual
problem in the Church cannot always be predicted beforehand.
This can be seen from the following comment in the 1913
Catholic Encyclopedia: “No canonical provisions exist regulating
the authority of the College of Cardinals sede Romanâ impeditâ,
i.e. in case the pope became insane, or personally a heretic; in
such cases it would be necessary to consult the dictates of right
reason and the teachings of history.” (“Cardinal,” CE 3:339)
Moreover, an inability at present to determine exactly how
another true pope would be chosen in the future does not somehow
make Paul VI and his successors into true popes by default.
Nor does it change what we already know: that the post-
Conciliar popes promulgated errors, heresies and evil laws; that
a heretic cannot be a true pope; and that promulgating evil laws
is incompatible with possessing authority from Jesus Christ.
To insist despite this that the post-Conciliar popes must be
true popes creates an insoluble problem for the indefectibility of
the Church — Christ’s representatives teach error and give evil"
Let's stick to true Traditionalism, and let the problem play out until the Lord makes things clear to us. Someone suggested making the character Yoda from Star Wars the "pope." It was a joke, but not more of a joke than Bergoglio (Francis) or any of these other conclavists/mysticalists. As "Pope Yoda" might say:
"Become conclavist do not. Soul will you lose. Know true Faith and theology you must."