So interesting that TGK has an unbridled and undying support for the satanic, heretical, and pro ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ novus ordo church. No sane traditional minded Catholic would attack with such utter contempt a true Catholic bishop who tried to help the faithful even into his octogenarian years, while exempting any criticism of his pro homo “pope” and “hierarchy”.

I can only conclude one of three things: 1) He isn’t sane (this is the most charitable) 2) He is not traditional minded, but actually a NO infiltrator 3) He is not a Catholic, but is actually a evil person looking to sow discord among real Catholics.

Bishop williamson use to say that sedevacantism and the novus ordo are two sides of the same coin

The late BpW did say that and I think he was right. He was able to see someone’s situation and give advice on a case by case basis. In the situation where there is a conservative NO Mass nearby and it isn’t damaging to your faith or your children’s faith then there is no reason not to go, especially if no trad Mass available. 

Recent Novus Ordo activity:

Well, I look at it this way, he believes that the pervert Mr. Prevost is a true pope.
...
TGK, being the “good Catholic” that he is, submits to his “pope” Mr. Prevost. I don’t believe that any person in the world, including all traditional minded Catholics, would doubt that Mr. Prevost is the head of the NO church. Thus, I’m forced to conclude that TGK (charitably assuming that his sanity is questionable) supports, at least by acknowledgment, the evil NO church which he erroneously believes to be the Catholic Church.

I thought so.

You could LITERALLY say that about anyone who isn't Sedevacantist. Sorry, but Sedevacantists are not the only valid Traditional Catholics, or heirs of the Traditional Movement.

There are plenty of good Catholics who are not Sedevacantist, don't care, or realize their opinion is worthless anyhow, so they don't worry about it.

The Pope Question is STILL a private opinion, STILL a mystery, STILL unsolved, and NO ONE knows how this Crisis is going to be resolved in the end. In my opinion, it is a supernatural mystery (i.e., can't be known or solved by reason alone, or without God's direct intervention) and I have good reason for holding this opinion (the lack of "solution" for the past 55 years, despite the attempts of dozens of GIANTS of sanctity, education, and/or wisdom). If the Traditional Catholic world as a whole is still confused and divided today in 2025, it is going to remain that way until God intervenes. Period.

The Pope Question, sadly, remains in the realm of private opinion. We all have opinions, and frankly they are all just as valid as each other. Some might be slightly more well-founded -- but in the end, they are still just opinions. Not sufficient to condemn others when they disagree with you. Not sufficient to bind the conscience of others.

Sorry, but Sedevacantists are not the only valid Traditional Catholics, or heirs of the Traditional Movement.

There are plenty of good Catholics who are not Sedevacantist, don't care, or realize their opinion is worthless anyhow, so they don't worry about it.
way until God intervenes. Period.

Please point out, in my nearly 4800 posts, where I stated that sedevacantists are the “only valid traditional Catholics”.

Also, do you have some connection to this nut who uncharitably attacks one of the few Catholic bishops who actually did something to help the faithful in the wake of Vatican II? The reason I ask this is because you *seem* to look the other way when TGK attacks Bishop Thuc with erroneous and debunked information, but when Ladislaus simply stated an inconvenient truth about Bishop Williamson you had a conniption.

BTW: I did report him to you and nothing was done.

Christ promised "The gates of hell shall not prevail against it"
But sedevacantists claim we haven't had a Pope in 62+ years.
Therefore sedevacantists deny Christ's promise.

But somehow you and others in the SSPX / Resistance don’t deny Christ’s promise by presuming Christ’s Church can universally bind heretical and sinful teachings on the faithful… That is 100% more of an explicit denial than any claim sedes make.

Also you know 100% sedes don’t deny Christ’s words. Stupid argument. You don’t get to extrapolate Bible passages to mean anything you want, leave that for Protestants.

Please point out, in my nearly 4800 posts, where I stated that sedevacantists are the “only valid traditional Catholics”.

Also, do you have some connection to this nut who uncharitably attacks one of the few Catholic bishops who actually did something to help the faithful in the wake of Vatican II? The reason I ask this is because you *seem* to look the other way when TGK attacks Bishop Thuc with erroneous and debunked information, but when Ladislaus simply stated an inconvenient truth about Bishop Williamson you had a conniption.

BTW: I did report him to you and nothing was done.

1. You are arguing against non-sedevacantists in a very absolute manner. By your argumentation, non-sedes are positively Conciliar. I absolutely am stating and summarizing your position correctly. Let's not pretend here. If non-sedes "accept the Pope" and are "Conciliar", then it LOGICALLY follows as the ONLY POSSIBLE conclusion, that only sedevacantists can be considered Traditional Catholic.

2. I didn't have a "conniption fit". I don't appreciate your disrespectful tone. I objected to the content, which is my right as moderator of the forum.

3. There are two categories of things you can't post on this forum.
A) Things that violate Catholic morality, things sinful/immodest/breaking the rules
B) Things that I personally can't stomach, or won't tolerate. A.K.A. "It's my forum"

I try to limit which items I moderate for reason B), but I will readily admit that I do resort to this category from time to time. Each and everyone one of would as well, if you were in my position, so let's keep it real. In fact, I'd bet dollars to donuts that most of you would be swinging around the moderation/ban hammer MUCH MORE than I ever do.

4. I have received a couple complaints about specific posts, but actually most of these reports were about OTHER members arguing with TGK.

5. TGK seems to be mostly arguing against Abp. Thuc, and that is permitted on this forum. This is not a Thuc or even a Sedevacantist forum. I heard criticism(s) about Abp. Thuc going back 19 years -- it's nothing new. Maybe if you don't like these "debunked points" you need to get off your butt and debunk them again. People like me still aren't on board the Thuc train. You're going to have to do the work to convert us. Third party readers can then read the whole thread, and make up their minds for themselves.

6. I will repeat to you what I told Ladislaus. If there is a specific post that slanders a particular cleric, there is a good chance I will take action upon learning about it. But currently my queue or inbox "to be processed" of such posts is precisely: 0.

1. You are arguing against non-sedevacantists in a very absolute manner. By your argumentation, non-sedes are positively Conciliar. I absolutely am stating and summarizing your position correctly. Let's not pretend here. If non-sedes "accept the Pope" and are "Conciliar", then it LOGICALLY follows as the ONLY POSSIBLE conclusion, that only sedevacantists can be considered Traditional Catholic.

Well tell that to my SSPX attending and antisedevacantist son’s godparents. Funny thing that I held them (and still do) to be good enough Catholics to be my child’s god parents. To be clear, I was a diehard sedevacantist at the time when I asked them.

BTW: I didn’t have a fourth category for TGK (being a Catholic and honestly mistaken about the status of the pope) because of his sick and irrational attitude toward Bishop Thuc.