I don't know what Samuel's reasons were yet, but for myself, I pretty much quit blogging when I began to question whether I was working at cross-purposes with +BW and +BZ (i.e., I was trying to grow a new SSPX movement, whereas +BW wanted no replacement or large movement and was encouraging independence, while +BZ was wanting to remain invisible).

while +BZ was wanting to remain invisible).

Sean, you must have been in a bad mood when you wrote this.

To rebut your words, I only have to quote this guy named Sean Johnson:
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/being-too-picky-about-your-priest/msg654959/#msg654959

Sean, you must have been in a bad mood when you wrote this.

To rebut your words, I only have to quote this guy named Sean Johnson:
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/being-too-picky-about-your-priest/msg654959/#msg654959

That post explains why +BZ doesn't write or want his sermons recorded.

It does not explain why there can be no SAJM US District website, or announcing Mass venues and times, etc..

For example: Can you tell me where the closest Mass to my house will be this weekend?

Speaking of having a big website to publicize a Resistance chapel, I want to underline a point.

What has it done for our chapel here?

Basically nothing. We've had more people through here, but in one window and out the other, like cross-ventilation. No tangible long term benefit to the chapel. There are only so many well-formed Traditional Catholics who understand the fight (Modernism, Vatican II, etc.) and who understand the Traditional Catholic movement -- the justification for disobeying the Pope, and the LACK OF NEED for any kind of permission from Conciliar authorities.

You can have all the advertising in the world, but you can't reach people who don't exist! The fact is, everyone with the old SSPX position is probably with the SSPX, and chances are they STILL are with the SSPX for practical reasons. Throwing money and resources into a blog or other advertising is not likely to have a great effect.

Believe me, I've tried! I've spent hours talking to people on the phone, in person, after Mass, etc. and although we are super-friendly and accommodating with newcomers (no horror stories here!) everyone decides they don't belong and they stop coming at some point. The priests didn't give a sermon on the h0Ɩ0cαųst or anything controversial like that, either.

(By horror stories I mean classic Trad horror stories like going up to a young married couple and asking, "Are you pregnant yet? You're not using birth control are you?" or going up to a woman and saying, "That dress is immodest, you slut!")

That post explains why +BZ doesn't write or want his sermons recorded.

It does not explain why there can be no SAJM US District website, or announcing Mass venues and times, etc..

For example: Can you tell me where the closest Mass to my house will be this weekend?

Oh, and I forgot to add --

things are too much in flux to have standard times posted. Our chapel used to have Mass on the 1st Sunday of every month, but now it's up in the air again. Even travelers don't get much benefit from a site that lists chapels, if you don't know when Mass is going to be.

Even the Houston, TX chapel had irregular Mass times for a while, even though they always got Sunday Mass. Usually it was in the morning, but sometimes it was in the evening. And that's at a "Priory" (to use SSPX nomenclature) that Bp. Zendejas personally bought and owns!

Seriously, Sean, if we compared the Resistance to the early SSPX, we'd have to put our current state at about 1970. But even then, the SSPX was better off than the Resistance today (unless you count having 4 bishops). Did the SSPX have a fully featured website (or booklet, since the Internet didn't exist yet) to list all chapels in 1970, on opening day?