CathInfo.com

But I do not believe the Mass will be totally suppressed.

DR, no matter how many times you keep saying the same thing ... as if by saying it often enough that makes it true ... your assertion, as poetic as you wish to wax about it, remains unproven.

"Power", Latin "potestas", is nothing other than a habitual potency.  And, if the fact that the habitual potency remains suffices to make it true that St. Peter has always had and always will have perpetual successors, despite there being fairly regular, and sometimes lengthy, interregna, then there's nor reason it can't make it true that the general governing / authority of the Church cannot remain, in potency as well.  And, if it cannot perdure in potency, then it also doesn't work to use that as the explanation for why the papacy hasn't defected.

So, Archbishop Lefebvre contends that the "notes" of the Catholic Church are with Traditional Catholics ... with the notes being those attribute that make the Church knowable as the Church founded by Christ, then in his and the "R&R" perspective, the notes are divided ... where some notes, such as profession of the true faith, oneness, holiness, those reside among Traditional Catholics, but then this other visible attribute, the governing authority, is visibly divided from the rest of the Church, resulting in an essentially divided visible Church.

As for the privationists, where you cite them ... yeah, they too hold that the authority is only there among the bishops in potency, not in act.  So ... not sure why you think they support your case.

Nor can any sedevacantists, such as the neo-Conclavists make the case that the governing authority continues "in act", but among the sedevacantists bishops ... since no teaching authority and no governing authority exists outside the Pope, and they hold that no bishop remains alive today who had been given such authority by the Pope.

That's precisely why we have Father Lavery in total desperation claiming that the "ghost of Pacelli" (my expression) supplies jurisdiction to Bishop Roy, Bishop Pivarunas, etc.  That's absurd on the face of it.

So you're trying to have your cake and eat it to, building a case from the sedeprivationists but then rejecting that authority remains in potency, which is what they hold ... and then blending it together with some R&R concepts and some of the concepts from the neo-Conclavists ... but they really don't mix.

The papacy always exists, but the pope does not always exist. Therefore we may say that the pope always exists in potentia. But the episcopate always exists in actu.

Or, in plain English, there will always actually be true pastors and doctors in the Church, until the end of time, as the Vatican Council taught very clearly and directly.