I've pointed out before that Xavier is not actually a Traditional Catholic, but rather a traditonal Catholic. Traditional Catholics (with the capital T) hold that V2 and the NOM represet ruptures with Tradition and are harmful. Xavier holds that the traditional forms are simply more perfect.
Fact: Jorge Bergoglio worshipped the pachamama idol in the Vatican gardens.
Fact: Nishant Xavier claims Bergoglio is Catholic and has defended him in recent threads here on Cathinfo.
How can you seriously claim that Nishant is Catholic?
He’s not Catholic. He’s a Novus Ordo apostate.
There’s an interesting episode recorded in Church history of Hypatius hearing Nestorian preach heresy from the pulpit. He immediately broke communion with Nestorius. Bishop Eulalius rebuked Hypatius for breaking communion with the heretic before a declaration from Rome. But Bishop Eulalius agreed that Nestorius was a heretic. Later Rome did excommunicate Nestorius and at the same time praised Hypatius for breaking communion immediately. Bishop Eulalius was neither praised nor condemned and Hypatius did not break communion with Eulalius at any time.
How does Nishant compare? Bergoglio is not merely a heretic but he is an idol-worshipping apostate, the worst of the worst. Nishant not only didn’t break communion with him, but he defends him as a faithful Catholic. But that’s not enough for Nishant, he had to attack the Catholics who did break communion with the apostate and then convert some of them to the filthy apostate Novus Ordo religion. Nishant ought to be condemned and avoided by all good Catholics. Don’t expect Our Lord to praise you if you remain in communion with apostates.