P.S. I downvoted you because you are a member of a false religion posing as a Catholic; and even worse, peddling your BS on a Catholic forum.

Is that so? That's a serious and slanderous claim, why don't you try to prove it by quoting theological sources like I do? But you will never be able to, so it's just dishonest and libelous from you. I would die rather than deny any True Dogma of the Catholic Faith, your pet "dogmas" like schismatic sedevacantism don't count. Meanwhile, if you hold to a supposed 66 year interregnum, you're the non-Catholic, because that is heretical. The reasons why I've explained in the relevant thread, and are well explained in the Indult traditionalist literature. Even SSPX Priests have been convinced/persuaded by it, which is part of the reason why many SSPX Priests are now effectively Indult traditionalists and desire full communion/unity with Rome. You aren't, miss, because you either don't read, or don't know enough, or don't seek the Truth, or all of those.

As even some sede posters here have said, attrition rates in some rad trad/sede families is 50% or more, which means half the children or more leave the Catholic Faith entirely. You can keep putting your head in the sand and thinking an almost 70 year interregnum is not a problem or has nothing to do with that if you want, but you've been proved wrong, and will be proved wrong more in the future. Many have already and rightly left sedevacantism because of it, including Priests, and I foresee more doing so in the next 10 to 15 yrs. A 70 or 80 year interregnum? Pathetic.

For traditional Roman Catholics who know communion with Rome is part of being faithful to Tradition, we will continue to do our best both to make Tradition more widely available within the Church, and to ensure the Good Cardinals/Bishops like those I mentioned - and adding Bishop +Athanasius Schneider to the list - have widespread support, get appointed to high positions in the Church, and hopefully elected one day to the Papacy. The good works the FSSP and Indult Traditionalists have done in the past 35+ years have already benefited millions of souls and will continue to. I also encourage those who actually want to understand the Indult position rather than just strawman it to read Fr. Ripperger's actual writings like, The Merit of the Mass: https://unavocecanada.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/The-Merit-Of-A-Mass.pdf

https://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/2023/08/on-superior-merit-of-traditional-mass.html We hold the TLM obtains more graces than the NOM does, and therefore informed Priests should indeed offer the TLM, if possible in their Parishes, or else in Traditional Fraternities like the FSSP. But the faithful, if the NOM is the only Mass available, may indeed go to it, as pwn said above, a position which follows logically from the right opinion that the NOM is only inferior to the TLM, but is not heretical, blasphemous or sacrilegious. The "40 km rule", once given by Archbishop Lefebvre, shows His Grace himself once held the Indult traditionalist view of the New Mass and Sacraments (a view he also signed in the May 1988 Protocol), which those who deny will hardly be able to explain the reasons for what he said:

"Make every effort to have the Mass of St. Pius V, but if it is impossible to find one within forty kilometers and if there is a pious priest who says the New Mass in as traditional a way as possible, it is good for you to assist at it to fulfill your Sunday obligation."

Taken from: https://sspx.org/en/what-archbishop-lefebvre-said-about-new-mass-30166 He also said, exhorting people to avoid all New Masses, even with no other option, would be encouraging atheism, which is what mindless rigorists (whom even Bishop Williamson has called out), are thoughtlessly doing, and that is what you see reflected in that 50%+apostasy/attrition rate, though you don't realize it. Meanwhile, those who encourage at least weekly Mass, and Sunday communion, even if it be at the NOM, if not daily Mass, see higher rates of perseverance in Faith. Here's the 2nd quote from +ABL: "

Should all the world’s churches be emptied? I do not feel brave enough to say such a thing. I don’t want to encourage atheism."[10]

Taken from: https://sspx.org/en/what-archbishop-lefebvre-said-about-new-mass-30166 +ABL didn't hold what Wathen did. It is very clear.

Is that so? That's a serious and slanderous claim, why don't you try to prove it by quoting theological sources like I do? But you will never be able to, so it's just dishonest and libelous from you. I would die rather than deny any True Dogma of the Catholic Faith, your pet "dogmas" like schismatic sedevacantism don't count. Meanwhile, if you hold to a supposed 66 year interregnum, you're the non-Catholic, because that is heretical. The reasons why I've explained in the relevant thread, and are well explained in the Indult traditionalist literature. Even SSPX Priests have been convinced/persuaded by it, which is part of the reason why many SSPX Priests are now effectively Indult traditionalists and desire full communion/unity with Rome. You aren't, miss, because you either don't read, or don't know enough, or don't seek the Truth, or all of those.

As even some sede posters here have said, attrition rates in some rad trad/sede families is 50% or more, which means half the children or more leave the Catholic Faith entirely. You can keep putting your head in the sand and thinking an almost 70 year interregnum is not a problem or has nothing to do with that if you want, but you've been proved wrong, and will be proved wrong more in the future. Many have already and rightly left sedevacantism because of it, including Priests, and I foresee more doing so in the next 10 to 15 yrs. A 70 or 80 year interregnum? Pathetic.

For traditional Roman Catholics who know communion with Rome is part of being faithful to Tradition, we will continue to do our best both to make Tradition more widely available within the Church, and to ensure the Good Cardinals/Bishops like those I mentioned - and adding Bishop +Athanasius Schneider to the list - have widespread support, get appointed to high positions in the Church, and hopefully elected one day to the Papacy. The good works the FSSP and Indult Traditionalists have done in the past 35+ years have already benefited millions of souls and will continue to. I also encourage those who actually want to understand the Indult position rather than just strawman it to read Fr. Ripperger's actual writings like, The Merit of the Mass: https://unavocecanada.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/The-Merit-Of-A-Mass.pdf

https://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/2023/08/on-superior-merit-of-traditional-mass.html We hold the TLM obtains more graces than the NOM does, and therefore informed Priests should indeed offer the TLM, if possible in their Parishes, or else in Traditional Fraternities like the FSSP. But the faithful, if the NOM is the only Mass available, may indeed go to it, as pwn said above, a position which follows logically from the right opinion that the NOM is only inferior to the TLM, but is not heretical, blasphemous or sacrilegious. The "40 km rule", once given by Archbishop Lefebvre, shows His Grace himself once held the Indult traditionalist view of the New Mass and Sacraments (a view he also signed in the May 1988 Protocol), which those who deny will hardly be able to explain the reasons for what he said:
Taken from: https://sspx.org/en/what-archbishop-lefebvre-said-about-new-mass-30166 He also said, exhorting people to avoid all New Masses, even with no other option, would be encouraging atheism, which is what mindless rigorists (whom even Bishop Williamson has called out), are thoughtlessly doing, and that is what you see reflected in that 50%+apostasy/attrition rate, though you don't realize it. Meanwhile, those who encourage at least weekly Mass, and Sunday communion, even if it be at the NOM, if not daily Mass, see higher rates of perseverance in Faith. Here's the 2nd quote from +ABL: "
Taken from: https://sspx.org/en/what-archbishop-lefebvre-said-about-new-mass-30166 +ABL didn't hold what Wathen did. It is very clear.

I made no claim. Claims require demonstrations.

Rather you have made both multiple claims and multiple demonstrations across multiple topics.

Your demonstrations lead to inevitable conclusions; and now I have made an observation, drawn from those same demonstrations and conclusions.

No further proofs are required, unless, of course, I choose to allow you to gaslight me, paradigm shift me, and waste my time. But I do not so choose.

The mentality displayed here is a great reminder of why the SSPX of old warned so strongly against attending Masses said under the indult (FSSP etc).

It’s a matter of: DOCTRINE, DOCTRINE, DOCTRINE.

If any of these four cardinals would make a good Pope, why haven’t they come out and publicly repudiated Vatican 2, told Francis that he professes a non-Catholic faith, etc.

The problem is divine, so the solution will be divine. We don’t just vote our way out of something like this. The problem is solved by fire and chastisement.

Traditional Catholics: stay away from FSSP and Indult. Even though there may be individual priests and laity there of good will, the entire system is contaminated.

Could it be that men lack true courage?  Why hasn't a group of men gotten together and taken over the Vatican?  We all seem to be waiting for someone else to do something.

Cardinal Erdo, Archbishop of Budapest in Hungary, is considered a Papabile. He respects the TLM, and is favorable to outreach toward the Orthodox. He would probably be the best candidate.

"But Cardinal Erdő is also respected by liberals like the Holy Father..."

That last sentence says more than I need to know, and his "outreach toward the Orthodox", aka, Ecuмenism is also not a positive.

You consider this man to be the "best candidate"?  Says a lot about you.

What irks me about some friends/family that still stay in the N.O., is that a lot of them think a "good" or "more conservative" pope will change things... No, he will not.. And some of my family even know it, and still don't take on even going to the SSPX. 

Vat 2 and the popes since Roncalli are not legit.

Roncalli is in your local Mason's log's books, btw, go and ask about it.

As even some sede posters here have said, attrition rates in some rad trad/sede families is 50% or more, which means half the children or more leave the Catholic Faith entirely. You can keep putting your head in the sand and thinking an almost 70 year interregnum is not a problem or has nothing to do with that... Many have already and rightly left sedevacantism because of it, including Priests, and I foresee more doing so in the next 10 to 15 yrs.

So you suggest going to the New Order where the minority who might remain do not believe in the Real Presence and do believe in women priests?  Interesting approach. 

Vat 2 and the popes since Roncalli are not legit.

Roncalli is in your local Mason's log's books, btw, go and ask about it.

Yep.  It's morally certain that Roncalli was a Mason and Communist agent, installed into the See of Peter as an infiltrator.