CathInfo.com

Wicked a Malicious hmmmm
And what do sedes say about Archbishop Lefebvre? They put Thuc on a pedestal and call Archbishop Lefebvre wishywashy. Making bishops for a cult and for 2 different types of sedes gets you on a pedestal.
First time in my life I had to deal with sedes so I look into it and find mumbo jumbo.

Your posts are also incoherent, showing your low IQ.  You come in here slandering good bishops like Pivarunas (whose name you failed to spell correctly the first 4-5 times you tried and yet were pontificating about his lack of qualifications).

Get lost.

Again, the absurd irony of you carrying water for the Masonic infiltrators of the papacy while denouncing how many are not "smart enough" to see that politics have been taken over by the Masons.  So has the Papacy, moron ... it's been infiltrated by a series of Antipopes, and you're "not smart enough" to see it and don't have enough Catholic faith in the indefectibility of the Church to realize that the Papacy is protected by the Holy Ghost and cannot destroy the Church (something Lefebvre also taught ... but which you liars who pretend to be his followers reject).

+Lefebfre repeatedly stated that the Holy Ghost protects the papacy from this degree of destruction, and that SV is a possible answer.  It was only for a few years in the early 1980s that he did not believe that SV was very possible.

Yet another troll!

Yeah, he started slandering Bishop Pivarunas left and right without any justification ... and the first several times he attempted it, he had 3 spelling mistakes in his last name, indicating how knowledgeable he was about Bishop Pivarunas.

Now he's attacking +Vigano (because +Vigano went at-least-semi-sede) but then ignoring Bishop Williamson, who also stated this this vote was a "victory for common sense" ... who gets a pass because he's not sedevacantist.

Then he talks about plants and Masonic infiltrators, saying how only a plant would not "know" that politics has been taken over by them, and yet it's very obvious that the same Jєωιѕн-Masonic infiltrators have infiltrated the Church and the papacy ... but he constantly defends those guys while attacking SVs.

It's obvious that he just has some contempt for the SVs, and seems to have some personal animosity against Bishop Pivarunas (while taking passing shots at other SVs).

While I disagree with Bishop Pivarunas on quite a few issues, some of them emphatically, I've watched him speak (at least online) many times and he seems like a very knowledgeable, competent, well-trained, and sincere individual, a good priest who cares about the salvation of souls.  We can disagree with individuals on their positions without slandering them.

Archbishop Lefebvre wrote against sedevacantism in his very last book called "Open Letter to Confused Catholics," published, I believe, in 1992. It's not true that he was only against sedevacantism in the early 1980's.

Such "waffling" in a competent and trustworthy prelate should lead you to understand that there is no place for dogmatic SVism and no place for dogmatic anti-SVism.