Isn't transubstantiation the true miracle -- Eucharistic Miracles are no more or less supernatural than what takes place at every valid Mass. And the grace that comes along with the Mass and the Holy Eucharist is 100% supernatural.

But you should have seen the wicked priests and bishops who lived before the Protestant Revolt. I wasn't there, but I have a good imagination and I've read my history books. Let's just say the Protestants DID have something to go on, a grain of truth, something that resonated with the disaffected Faithful -- that the Church WAS in a horrible, sorry state. Widespread ignorance, avarice, doctrinal error, moral depravity (including concubinage) and so forth. Priests were slaves to all 7 of the capital sins; guilty of mortal sins against all 10 of the Commandments (some more common than others).

Many purist Trads, if they found ourselves in such circuмstances, would be revolted, wash our hands of the whole thing, and would become home-aloners -- or even Protestants, once an eloquent heresiarch appeared in our village and started out by decrying the abuses -- speaking the truth. Just look at Pfeifferville. Those people went off the deep end, joining a cult, because their leader has a foundation of truth to go off -- and the people just go along for the ride. They come for the condemnation of the various neo-SSPX evils (GOOD!) and stay for the cult (BAD!) Just like poor Catholics in the 1500's came for the condemnation of clerical vices (GOOD!) and stayed for the heresy (BAD!)

The rape of a woman is objectively evil just as the Novus Ordo Mass is objectively evil.  The rape is an act of such grievous nature  as to characterize it as one of the necessary elements of a mortal sin.  Nevertheless, God may allow the conception of a human being (i.e., a creature composed of a body and soul, and made to the image and likeness of God) to take place -- the miracle of life and that new creation of a human being made in the image and likeness of God is an objectively good thing, even though the subsequent birth is classified as illegitimate and the child is classified as a bastard.  (As an aside and perhaps needless to say, the bastard may possibly grow up to be a great saint.)

Again, human conception with the infusion of an eternal soul (leaving aside any discussion concerning the exact time of ensoulment) took place as a result of the rape.

Would not the miraculous bringing forth of a human life arising out of a rape (evil in and of itself) be in some way similar to the miraculous act of transubstantiation that takes place in the Sacrament of the Eucharist incorporated into the Novus Ordo Mass if the necessary elements of that Sacrament are present? 

I do not claim that all that I have stated above is a 100% correct statement of truth. I think it is, but I don't claim it to be with anything approaching absolute certainty.  Rather  I put it forth for the purpose of good faith discussion.

Just as we would never condone rape we need not ever condone the Novus Ordo Mass. At the same time however we should realize that God Almighty allows both and that from both there may arise good.  What is of paramount importance is that we clearly realize that any good comes about not because of the rape or the objectively deficient Mass, but in spite of them.

Furthermore, our Catholic Theology informs us, of course, that a good end can never justify evil means. Rape and the Novus Ordo Mass are evil means and therefore no good end can be used to justify them.

If that's what you took away from my post, then you need to re-read it. I'll leave it at that.

Mostly but not all...thankfully.

That's not how non-sedevacantists (such as the Resistance) view the Crisis in the Church, however.

A Resistance priest sent out a lengthy email a couple of days ago, which I'd mentioned, lamenting the fact that many under his wing have now separated themselves from him over +Williamson's comments.  Many Resisters, it turns out, don't agree with +Williamson regarding the New Order Bastardo Missae.

One needn't be a sedevacantist to disagree with Bishop Williamson regarding the NOM.  Father Hewko (notoriously ANTI-sedevacantist) would be one of those.  Sedevacantists were never really "on board" with Bishop Williamson in the first place, so there's no "separation" taking place as a result.