We are tempted to criticize these villains who suppress natural cancer cures and treatments because they are generic, out-of-patent, cheap, and money can't be made off them.

But how many of us would do differently?

You are an M.D. You owe $200,000 for student loans. You are treating cancer, making good money at it, making bonuses whenever chemotherapy is used, etc.

Would YOU PERSONALLY push a $20 cancer cure on your patients, knowing that you will virtually never get out of debt? Or do you compromise, for pragmatic reasons?

I know everyone says "I'd be the hero" but how many are attending the Mass of their convictions -- and how many are compromising because their family needs weekly Mass, their kids need a school, their wife needs a wide social circle, you don't want to so "needed" for volunteering as you would be in a smaller group, you don't want to drive farther for fewer Masses, you don't want to rebuild from scratch, you don't want to be criticized by friends for being part of an "extreme" group, etc.?

The Resistance is a good example of this, but it's not the only example. How many people look at what Masses are available in their area FIRST, and THEN form their convictions? Way more Trads than the number who are honest enough to admit it. Only you and God know the truth; I suggest you meditate on it, be honest with yourself, and honest with God.

How many in St. Mary's KS have impartially looked at the case pro-and-con the Resistance and honestly decided against it? And how many just want to be part of the "in crowd" and the Basilica they're building? Of the 3,900 Trads in St. Marys that went with the SSPX, I bet very few of them did an honest investigation or assessment.

In fact, distortion and lies are involved here as well. SSPX authorities (and many of the Faithful!) go out of their way to mix up Fr. Pfeiffer/pablo with the Resistance. They basically slander the Resistance with lies. They use ad-hominems, poison the well, and outright distortions, inaccuracies, and lies. Just like the bad guys slander the real cures for cancer and the doctors who promote said cures. So what's the difference exactly?

I remember meeting a catholic healer in Ireland , who healed many people. I met him through a nun. He's dead now. But he had interesting thoughts on healing and so did the nun - it seemed to me we were going about healing all wrong, we didn't need to beg on our hands and needs for God to heal us, that we can gain healing through faith. That we believe we had be healed, we would receive it . And sure enough people were getting healed that way . 

Just an interesting thought , this teaching has died out.

But I remember at Bernadette said we have to go into the Lourdes water in faith and that's how we get healed 

I’m not sure your analogy is good.  If I were a doctor with a cancer cure, I’d have to be very strategic in dispensing the information, otherwise, I could expect to mysteriously vanish or have an unfortunate fatal accident.  The medical/pharma industry would put me out of business and or suppress the cure and render it prohibitively expensive before releasing it to the public.  I’d go first into hiding with my entire family and vulnerable associates, get lawyered up, have a small army of security guards, and still prepare for martyrdom.  
Going to Mass in a less than ideal setting is a bit different than suppressing a cancer cure and risking your life and family’s lives to go public.  No chapel, order, fraternity, or parish is 100% perfect.  Not that the Church Herself is imperfect, but that the Church Militant is comprised of humans, all of whom are stained with Original Sin.  It’s more of a balancing act; can I, can my family save their souls in hearing Mass at ______________?  Unlike your imaginary $20 cancer cure that is 100% guaranteed, much more depends upon the individual souls.  (Remember, too, that there are plenty of people in this world for whom $20 is a year’s wage!). I’m not advocating following the crowd like so many blind men, but there are times when some compromise is allowable, even preferable.  Do we follow direct heresy espoused by Francis?  Worship idols?  Commit fornication, adultery, and sodomy?  Never!  Better to stay home alone and practice the Faith as best you can than commit mortal sin.  (This is what I’ve been doing for going on two years.)  But I’ll be honest, if I could go to the SSPX, so long as the priest is validly ordained or has been conditionally reordained, I’d do it.  If there were a SSPV chapel nearby, I’d go there despite not being a dogmatic sedevacantist.  If there were a resistance chapel that’s not off the rails or under the control of a warlock, I’d go there, again, after checking out the priest and background.  If I had young children or a wife, I’d probably make different decisions than for just myself.  I know of a large family that switched from SSPX to FSSP in the early 2000’s, not so much for doctrinal reasons as because the teenagers at the SSPX were leading their teens into sinful attitudes and actions.  The youth at the FSSP parish were overwhelmingly better behaved, interested in the Faith, and there were more of them.  The SSPX, while it’s official doctrine was more in agreement, was not acceptable in practice.  There was a small group of teens, and as the years progressed, the parents’ decision turned out to be the correct one.  All but one of the SSPX youth left the Faith as soon as they turned 18 or moved out of their parents’ home.  Four of the children married from the FSSP, and to the best of my knowledge, they are all practicing the Faith.  
For those of us who lived before, through, and after Vat. II, it’s less likely we’ll be blind followers.  But for those who grew up in tradition and for whom Vat. II is not in living memory, I think it’s less likely to question changes or to even love the true Faith because there’s nothing to compare it to.  

Well...   Let's see.  I took my family out of the Novus Ordo (5 minutes from home) and started attending the FSSP traditional Mass (30 minutes from home) because I began to see the real deficiencies in the Novus Ordo--and because the priest at the parish made up his own words of consecration.

Later, I started attending an independent chapel with an elderly Benedictine priest (45 minutes from home) instead of that FSSP Mass after the archbishop had no problem with what the priest did and told me that I merely had a "bad experience" at Mass.

Still later, after the chapel was given to the SSPX and, after having been convinced of the invalidity of the new Rite of Episcopal Consecration, I left that chapel and now attend a sedevacantist chapel 2-1/2 hours away from home.   In fact, I know very few sedevacantists who attend their chapels because they are the closest chapels from their homes and many of them pass by numerous Novus Ordo, Indult, SSPX, and (perhaps even) Resistance chapels because of their convictions.  

No, he probably has similar justifications and excuses that WE OURSELVES USE ON A DAILY BASIS and that is the scary part!

Yes, great point.