If you want to play semantics, feel free, but don't expect me to get involved. In context my statement is that ABL and the SSPX deserve the credit for allowing the traditional movement to survive. You have not shown otherwise.
It's not semantics. It's pointing out that you made a certain statement despite your assertions that you didn't. I have never disputed that the SSPX and Archbishop Lefebvre have helped tradition to survive. I dispute only that they are solely responsible.
Right, because of course seminaries are entirely pointless, anyone can just learn the stuff, easy as pie.
Could you direct me to the post where I insinuated that seminaries are pointless?
No, they need to be taught, and they are best taught by other priests who know the TLM.
There were plenty of priests who knew how to say the TLM. There just weren't plenty who were willing
to say the TLM.
Further the seminaries allowed seminarians to get a proper formation which was becoming increasingly imposible at almost any other seminary.
I don't dispute that.
That is what is meant by without the SSPX and ABL, the Traditional latin sacraments would have died out
And I am disputing that the TL sacraments would have died out.
they founded seminaries to allow new people to become priests and new generations to learn and celebrate them.
I don't dispute that, either.
This was in fact the entire reason ABL founded the SSPX, so that people could continue to get a proper formation and it was the reason he did what he did in 1988 because he believed if he did not do so the church would lose someting invaluable.
I don't dispute that, either.
So some of you were confirmed by ABL as you've already stated.
Right. Two of us were and the other 8 were not.
This is all very well and good but my point is I've said before that without the SSPX, objectively speaking, sooner or later the traditional latin sacraments would have ceased to exist, except perhaps in isolated pockets here and there.
If there were isolated pockets, then that does not mean "cease to exist". I'm not suggesting that TLM's were plentiful. They're not exactly plentiful now. If my state relied on the SSPX as their only access to the TLM, there would be hundreds and hundreds of Catholics without access to it.
There would be no seminaries to train new priests, few if any bishops would be willing to give confirmation and certainly wouldn't be travelling to do it, the same to a more extreme extent goes for marriages and orders.
You have no idea if there would be "no seminaries". That's pure speculation on your part.
God would of course never abandon his church but as I stated before, I am dealing in facts, not 'what if's' and 'maybe's' and on the facts the ABL and the SSPX were absolutely essential for the survival of the Traditional Latin Sacraments and the traditional teaching of the church.
You're not dealing with facts. You're speculating on what you think
would have happened without the SSPX, and I've given you clear examples of tradition in the absence of the SSPX. Our local SSPX chapel has only been there for about 12 years. And that's one of only two, as I said. Where would the trads in my state be attending the TLM if they had only these 2 chapels to rely on? They'd be staying home or going to the N.O.
The other issue I would raise with independent priests is that of Jurisdiction, the SSPX faces the question as well, but the situations are by no means comparable.
Yes, the SSPX also has the issue of jurisdiction.
I cannot see this discussion going anywhere, so I'm simply going to leave it.
As you wish.