The younger generations you hold out hope for, only have hope due to Tradition.  The novus ordo only offers the new age religion of humanism, the freemasonic brotherhood of globalism and the one-world community of the age of anti-Christ.  It can bear no good fruits; 50 years have proved this.  

Yes, the hope is in the traditions and not the Novus Ordo. But for the traditions to be restored, it would take those within the Novus Ordo converting to tradition. I am simply trying to do what Archbishop Lefebvre called for. To cling to the Eternal Rome of generations upon generations while rejecting the Neo-modernist Rome. Where is the Eternal Rome? Somewhere among the muck it is there. It is not extinguished. It is just hard to see. I am trying to see Her and cling to Her. Some see hope in the Eastern Rites. Some see hope in the Russian Orthodox converting and becoming fervent Catholics after the Consecration of Russia (Does Bishop Williamson hope for this?). Some see hope in nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr Jєωs converting en masse and becoming good Catholics. I don't know the answers. But at some point we must be hoping for the conversion of the Pope in Rome to the true faith. Even sedeprivationists hope for this. So if not Francis, one of his successors will convert if the Church is to return for tradition. So I try to see hope in the little steps such as the movement of the tabernacles back to the high altar, ad-orientem worship, or the Latin Mass coming back and being celebrated by the younger priests within the local dioceses (my own local parish has a priest who celebrates the Latin Mass).

Perhaps I hope too much. I don't know. Lately I have been more hopeful and less dire in my thoughts. I am happy and trusting. But my father tells me people can smell my naivete.

Here's some of +Schneider's thinking --
http://callmejorgebergoglio.blogspot.com/2015/04/bishop-athanasius-schneiders-will-save.html

Yes, some of those quotes are troubling. It reminds me of the observation that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. Perhaps we should hope and pray to Saint Lucy that Schneider and others like him regain their eyesight completely. But I feel proud inferring that we can see and Bishop Schneider is half-blind.

I have to disagree.  I believe that men like +Schneider and +Burke are VERY DANGEROUS to Tradition.  In calling out the most egregious of the V2 era heresies, they present themselves as paragons of orthodoxy, whereas in point of fact they themselves are Modernists.  So people cold be lulled to sleep about other V2 errors by following their lead.

It's easy to figure out who Bergoglio is, but men like these create confusion by presenting the appearances of Traditional Catholic theology.

Ditto

 

Get back to me when the Not so Dynamic Duo actually condemns Vatican 2 and converts to the Catholic Faith.

Why am I not surprised that the biggest SSPX apologist (XavierSem) has so re-calibrated his scale of "good and bad" that a cold, dusty, half-eaten drumstick is the best food he ever finds?  After all, he's in the SSPX milieu now. They're losing it.

The SSPX is the dog who has returned to its vomit. They left the vomit of Vatican II, and now they have returned to it. Like pigs return to wallowing in the mire, even after they've been hosed off, so also the SSPX can't resist going back to the Conciliar Church and its errors.

All the modern-day Athanasiuses have fled for the Resistance. Anyone left is a sellout with one or more higher priorities than God and His glory, and the glory of Holy Mother Church.
Even if that "higher priority" is just "the good of the SSPX". Sorry, but God comes before the SSPX. If the SSPX has outlived its usefulness, then so be it. Human emotional attachment is not a virtue, nor is it meritorious. Cry a little, and move on. It's not like Christ ever made a promise to +ABL about how long the SSPX would last.

There are some real fanboys who have deified the SSPX and/or +ABL. They had their heart set on +ABL fixing the Crisis at some point, even if only post-humously via his SSPX.

But be of good cheer, SSPXers. His first choice of bishop, Bishop Williamson, is continuing the good fight. So +ABL still gets credit. And the SSPX formed all the good priests who left to form the Resistance. All 4 Resistance bishops were formed in the SSPX.

But you need to move on, already. The SSPX will do less good every year from now on, until they utterly fail. They are doomed, since the whole leadership has gone over to a pro-Vatican II mindset. There is no human hope of repair. Sure, God could work a miracle, but He could work a miracle with ANY religious group or Congregation. God could create a new congregation out of NOTHING, going from void to a new congregation of 500 full grown men. So saying "God could always convert them" doesn't mean much, practically speaking.

Just like I wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton because "God could always convert her. She still has a soul to save." Come to me asking for my vote AFTER she has converted then, OK?
We have to judge the objective goodness and badness of actions and positions AS THEY EXIST, in reality, TODAY.

You don't advise your daughter to marry an atheist or a Jєω because "He could always convert, and Jєωs make the best Catholics". You can't treat a Maybe as a "Yes". Especially since, for God, everything is a Maybe!

How do you reconcile this whole post with your "The One Ring" post?  Not trying to be snarky here, I'm just honestly confused.

What would you do if they did condemn Vatican II and convert to the Catholic faith in your eyes?

I would at least start to pay attention to them.  Having said that, I don't expect them to do any of that.

It's not a bad thing that Cardinal Burke and Bp. Schneider are calling attention to the Amazon synod docuмents. It's good to know what the Modernists are currently up to in the conciliar church. I would imagine that if +ABL were still alive, he would have something to say about a heretical synod taking place in the conciliar church, even though such a synod is not surprising.

+ABL did care about the Modernist shenanigans in the conciliar church, and he did speak out against them. Of course, since the SSPX no longer carries on the legacy of +ABL, they aren't saying much about the synod. I can't find anything about the synod on the SSPX DICI website. Apparently, they aren't concerned about it at all.

But Meg, there are others calling attention to this synod.  Why do we need to hear from Modernists in the "conciliar church" about other Modernists in the conciliar church?  

Because "we" aren't necessarily the ones that Burke and Schneider are trying to reach.

OK....but the folks they are trying to reach are being fooled by them.    

Ah, I see you added a little dig there.   Couldn't help yourself Meg could you?