The Church Medicated. Wow Chris. I'm trying but I can't even wake up my own Saturday Evening Novus Ordo going parents who instilled the true faith in me some 60 years ago.
Mom, I was baptized in the Latin Rite, you cried back in the 70's when they ripped apart our beautiful church and installed a brown totem pole as the tabernacle, you can pray both The Our Father and Hail Mary in Latin, you attended the TLM until you were 32 years old, your four boys are all baptized in the Latin rite, on and on. They listen and look right through me. Off to 5 pm Sat night NO. I tell them about all the sick news out of Rome. They tell me to lighten up. You take everything too serious. That Rome does not affect their faith. I've brought them to TLM. Mom remembers, she responds to the mass, but Sat night NO is just too darn convenient for them. It's also 45 minutes. They love Jesus Christ and Our Lady. Pray the Rosary. I'm disheartened Chris. This will indeed take an act of God to clean this mess up. At the same time Chris, never stop. I need your truth pill every morning.
There will always be a constant trickle of those who discover or rediscover the true (pre-VII) Catholic faith and TLM, but as you well point out it will not be a wholesale ground up laity inspired reestablishment. Sites like this will nourish those who adhere to Tradition, but it will take, against all human odds given the make-up of the cardinalate but not God's, the election of a truly Tradition minded pope (not a half-hearted one foot in Modernism one) to try to lead the vast majority of Catholics back, although many of those will fall out by refusing to return to the faith.
Indeed, and in order for that 'truly Tradition minded pope' to appear, will take God raising up someone 100% born for this particular job. Who will fear no-one because God is with him. The only question for me is whether Antichrist will appear him or after.
What you said about them looking right through you is due to the desensitizing effect the Bugnini rite has had on them over the decades. It's not just lack of incense, ceremony and Gregorian chant. It is a very insidious liturgy which is why the TLM is highly suppressed by Traditiones Custodes
Our priest also got rid of our beautiful choir whose repertoires and chants always matched/supported the liturgy. He claimed it was due to budget cuts (even though the church only paid a pittance to the choir director and four section leaders, while others were either volunteers or paid for by the choir director personally.)
A priest mentioned that he was told at the Saturday afternoon Mass to shorten his sermons so they could take advantage of the early bird specials at restaurants!!!
This sounds exactly like my parents too. They are boomers and definitely not going to change now. For many, switching to the TLM is a LIFESTYLE change. When you consider that these people have been going to the NO for 60 years, it’s no surprise the way they are.
Thats my mission ,now that I'm retired. I go to other sites and try to wake-up ignorant catholic's ,and there's a lot of them ,to what going on. 60yrs ago ,I was fighting the same battle.It is a seductive take over of the masonic cabal ,that is very powerful and resourceful. CCD programs deliberately taught Fluff instead of the faith. Now we have generations that are disgustingly dumb concerning the catholic faith.If you honestly listen to whats coming out of Rome you can see the ambiguity,inversion of language to seem to mean something orthodox but mean something the opposite,a real satanic manipulation is highly present.We are dealing with the devil himself and need God's help to purge this crap from the Catholic Church.
Or you could just tell everybody the truth for once: Robert Prevost's election was null and void because of the 13 illegal extra electors who violated papal election law. That might wake people up.
But I don't even hear a whisper of that from the supposed 'truth tellers'.
Universal Peaceful acceptance would not come into play because I never accepted the election. Neither did a number of people who see the same problems.
In what circumstances would a valid election require a 'Universal Peaceful acceptance' situation to come into play? If it's known to be valid, anyone opposing it would surely be irrelevant, anyway?
I don't know too much about this issue, just the basics, so any explanation you (or anyone else) can offer would be helpful.
I haven’t accepted him. Listen they violated Universi Dominici Gregis no. 33 by having thirteen extra electors. And UDG no. 76 says if you violate the election law the election is null and void with no declaration needed so it doesn’t matter whether people accept him or not. The guy isn’t pope. Do with it what you want, but constantly complaining about the guy without addressing the root of the problem is not going to solve anything.
No defect or impediment resulting from a law of human or ecclesiastical origin can invalidate the papacy of a Catholic man who is universally recognized as Pope. Supplied Jurisdiction and Universal Peaceful Acceptance absolutely come into play.
However, the Church has no authority or ability to supply for an impediment created by divine law. (You have to be a sane, adult male Catholic in order to be the Pope)
The law states that an election conducted outside of the terms it prescribes is nullified. Since they chose to conduct this election outside of the law it is, legally speaking, as if the election never happened. The fact is that, legally speaking, there was no election and the sede vacante that began with the death of Francis on 21 April 2025 is still in effect.
Universal and peaceful acceptance is irrelevant. People can universally and peacefully accept that the sky is yellow but that does not make it so. All of this can be remedied by calling the Cardinals back to vote according to the provisions of the law, but first it has to be acknowledged what actually happened here before there is even the remotest chance of that.
What about Francis's election? What about John XXIII thru Benedict? If one accepts these men as popes, he must accept & submit to all V2 & post-conciliar teaching, e.g. ecumenism & religious liberty, condemned by the pre-V2 Church, the novel collegiality, the Masonic & Modernist-inspired Novus Ordo, new laws & practices. "Recognize & Resist ("R&R") is not an option.
"Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: 'He who heareth you, heareth me'; and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians." - Pius XII, Humani Generis, 20
It is not possible for the pope to err in such a way that he would universally and authoritatively teach error in faith or morals, that he should give the Church harmful rites, or that he should establish universal laws and disciplines that are intrinsically harmful to souls.
In a recent youtube of What Catholics Believe, Fr Jenkins SSPV details an eye opening expose of how the roles of these papal imposters correlated as the antithesis and thesis to form the synthesis. I can't explain it well but it was one of those things wherein you're hearing something, you know that person is making logical sense.
Funny business at the Leo conclave would make for a fascinating news story for sure. As would the truth about Benedict's resignation and the Francis shoo-in. But they wouldn't change a thing.
It'd be like the tumbleweed aftermath of Diane Montagna's trad mass survey exposé.
While the man in the pew continues to view the Pope as some kind of Catholic CEO he will accept and even expect some backroom wheeler-dealing. Especially as some of that wheeler-dealing is now coming from traditional Catholic quarters as they attempt to reinstate the mass.
Clarity will come not from focusing on the conclaves, trying to pinpoint 'patient zero' as it were, but through showing that the heresy and humanism falling from Leo's lips mean that he cannot logically be the Pope. The chair of St Peter is the only post on Earth established by Our Lord; its occupant has one job and is guided by the Holy Spirit who cannot contradict Himself.
Now if a reporter could buttonhole Leo and ask if he really fits this description, that would be worth capturing on film...
Francis and Bendict are dead. Prevost is alive and needs to be dealt with. Besides the evidence here is infinitely better than with Francis.
And if it does no good to point out that he was invalidly elected then what is the point in throwing a hissy fit because he blesses a block of ice or congratulates some woman in England?
The frog in boiling water analogy. Turn up the heat slowly and the frog never knew what hit him. I was born in 1953 and made my communion in 1961 just before the Vatican 2 big boy went off. We were taught in grade school never ever question the authority of any priest, bishop, or pope. That was fine when the church was united and heretics weeded out. Today its still used as a trump card to keep Catholics in line. The priest who taught me religion in high school wearing a pair of dockers and golf shirt was ask "Father if you didn't have to read mass on Sunday would you go?" He said no so I stopped going. Sermon of a priest in our parish said if your only going to confession with venial sins your wasting the priest time. So I stopped going to confession. If Father said it was ok then it must be ok. I never thought just did what they said was ok. It was not until I returned to the Latin mass in the early 80s with a crusty old Irish priest that I began to think about what I was doing. I think thats the trouble with most Novus Ordo Catholics today. Never doubt or question what the clergy tell you and most don't know what a heresy is so its like the blues brothers, "Just play a standard set".
Your story is strikingly similar to mine. I was born in '54 and remember the pre conciliar Church well but in my foolish adolescence I wound up playing guitar at the folk masses. I was in no way a modernist and wasn't concerned with ecclesiastical matters but merely went along with the flow. Then in l980 I saw an ad in the paper for an ORCM Latin Mass which was held at the Tucson Community Center and never looked back. It was like stepping onto a time machine. I became active in SSPX, attended diocesan indult Masses, FSSP, ICK, and eventually joined the SSPX resistance - Marian Corps. I got fed up with their insistence that no matter what, these papal imposters were and are true sovereign pontiffs. Finally I joined the sede camp. It's amazing how we gravitate towards the ultimate truth over the decades. What you said about "never doubt or question" reminds me of the words of Marcel Lefebvre: "Satan's masterstroke was to sow disobedience through obedience."
A prime example of the boiling frog is the gay phenomenon. In conditioning the public to eventually accept the agenda they first had to de classify homosexuality as a mental disorder as was done in l973, (same year as Roe v Wade oddly enough). Then followed the gay "rights" movement and making words as "fag" politically incorrect and taboo. This came along with legislation prohibiting "discrimination" against sodomites and lezzies. Gradually the idea of same sex unions arrived until it became legal everywhere with the Supreme Court's approval. Now the transgender madness and mutilation of children's bodies along with drag queen story hour which is ultimately paving the way for legalized sex with children. I shudder at the though of seeing it in my lifetime and fear for what's ahead for my grandchildren. Yup, the queers should have been stopped at the NYC Stonewall rebellion in '69. That's when the genie was let out of the bottle. I am convinced that the propaganda machine has the power to condition most people to accept any degree of evil, and I mean any. As long as the Jooz control the MSM and Hollywood it's a sure bet that things will only get worse. I hate this world and don't understand why the divine chastisement hasn't yet befallen this wicked society.
I hope that something good comes out of this evil that is among us.
We are helpless without the grace of the Almighty.
Waking up to this sad reality is very painful but I would rather be in pain than not feel pain while sleeping in “blissful” falsehood.
For someone who has believed the lies of this world, one of which being the measure of success is having power and money, and influence, and education, and friends, it will be very difficult to want to accept reality:
We are nothing without God.
We were made in His own image and likeness.
We were purchased by the unstained blood of Christ.
We are instructed the order by which we should live through the power of Holy Ghost through our Church.
And if the church and it’s so called leaders are teaching falsehood, we know that it is not of God, rather is a false church with false teachings, false doctrines, false preachers — all abhorrent in the eyes of God.
Therefore, this false church has no authority over us.
I'm sorry to have to say this, but I have to disagree with Mr. Jackson on his "sleeping giant" theory. Something like 70ish % of so-called "Catholics" don't believe in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, which means they aren't Catholic at all. Even among the 30ish % left, it's still a minority who even care about the reality of the Crisis in the Church. 30 or 40 years ago, that theory might have made some sense, but in the Internet age? If these "sleeping giant" people are so devoted the Blessed Sacrament and the Rosary, why can't they see the truth?
Look at the Trad world... So many "see the Truth" about the Crisis in the Church, yet no matter how many TLMs get shut down, what do the Trads do? Not much. Pray the Rosary, etc. which is all well and good and needed, but when it comes to action? Not so much. Oh, some will help build a chapel or other related things like the folks in Virginia after their TLM was shut down and they had to move to a gym. Good on those folks, but their TLM was driven out of its natural home by an apostate bishop who should have been tossed into the street, and I mean literally. Just like all these apostate bishops should have been.
Where was this "sleeping giant" in 2002 when all the revelations of sexual abuse of teenage boys (for the most part) were an almost daily occurrence, when the mainstream media was having a field day trashing the Church and faithful priests and laity because of the sick actions of a minority of bishops and priests who were involved? If that wasn't enough to get people to take action against these apostate bishops and priests, NOTHING will be enough.
Let's not forget, even among many Trads, OBEDIENCE has become the ultimate virtue. That's why these apostate bishops can do what they want and can get away with it, because they know that all they have to do is say 'obedience' and pretty much every Catholic will cave in faster than a house of cards in a hurricane.
Sorry Mr. Jackson, I agree with you 99 + % of the time because you have a habit of spittin' facts, plain and simple. But on this particular ("sleeping giant") point alone, I think you are way off.
I would be perfectly fine being proven wrong, but I think there's a better chance of me winning the Powerball twice in a row...
There was that heroic minority in the Diocese of Springfield Illinois who struggled to get rid of their appalling Bishop Daniel Ryan. He used to cruise the red light district to pick up rentboys. That was well before 2002.
They even sent a delegate to Rome begging for action. Much good any of it did them. In fact, as you can see from this old clipping, they were blamed for trying to short circuit the proper procedure, which is the Pope's prerogative.
The only effective thing they could do was use publicity, including the early Internet. Which certainly earned them no fans among the Midwest bishops.
Ryan finally got a punishment which partially fitted his crimes. One of his rentboys gave a detailed description of his luxury apartment and naked body....
The late Fr John O'Connor (not to be confused with the Archbishop of New York) many years ago had the real dirt on whom he called "homo bishop Ryan." He also boldly exposed the Yids and was regarded as persona non grata. Back then they weren't called cancelled priests yet. He was one priest in a million, literally.
Yes, I remember a lot of that, there was that website rcf.org (still online) that detailed all that. Stephen Brady and other folks fought hard to get that scumbag bishop removed, and it should have been much simpler to accomplish that...
What we need is people with more of the spirit of Mr. Brady and his like minded associates, and far less of the mentality of Mr. Network.
This is a tad off subject but after debating with hundreds of atheists on facebook I've noticed that NEVER will they decry pedophilia when it concerns a secular source e.g. NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association) ;the Hollywood child sex trafficking rings; Epstein files: drag queen story hour; least of all the repulsive Rabbinical foreskin fetish upon infant boys. They only denounce child molestation when it concerns the priesthood.
No wonder that atheists have no coherent objections to sexual abuse of children. Carson Holloway wrote a very depressing article years ago: Dare we get real about sex? His grim conclusion was no, most of us dare not get real.
The vast majority of nice respectable married middle class church going Americans and West Europeans had no coherent objection to child abuse. Yes, they might lynch a paedo who came anywhere near their children. But they were using contraception and had severed the link between sex and procreation. They had opened the way to purely recreational sex, and could not children enjoy that as much as adults?
But a child can't meaningfully consent to such a grave matter. Who says? Holloway opens the earth beneath us in a few simple arguments so I felt I was dropping into Hell. Unfortunately his article is behind a paywall as it is so uncomfortable and thought provoking.
Yes, the atheists were being inconsistent in using the emotive topic of child abuse just as a weapon to attack the Church. But the logic is that anyone can have sex with a child if the child consents. Carson could see no way out of this hell without returning to full traditional Christian morality.
I keep hearing from so many sources about the great numbers of Catholics who no longer believe in the real presence but my question is why should we be surprised? For decades we've seen less and less reverence for and visibility of tabernacles, much less exposition of the Blessed Sacrament. Stashing the tabernacle in a corner or even in a separate chapel (as in Chicago's Holy Name Cathedral); removing communion rails; lay "ministers," communion in the hand; no longer kneeling to receive the Holy Eucharist - and even that! Almost always it is just referred to as "the Eucharist," and rarely the former. Priests no longer stress that receiving Holy Communion in mortal sin is a sacrilege. Why should they? Aren't they already treating it as mere bread? The Church has become protestant and guess what? Protties don't believe in transubstantiation, so why should the Novus Ordo? Duh, so what else is new?
And that is one of my pet peeves these days... What is this obsession with the term "the Eucharist"? Even some 'Trads' use the term. Apparently it was used in the past, but in this day and age, people who really believe in it shouldn't be caught dead using anything but Holy Eucharist or Blessed Eucharist. What's next? The Blessed Sacrament being referred to as just ' the sacrament'?
Yes, but I have seen the term 'the Eucharist' in even pre-V II writings, not often but it has happened. Example, in books that are written by or compiled from writings of St. Peter Julian Eymard, which I find very odd.
As you said, "It’s all subtle verbal engineering". That is very true. Also in writing as I'm sure you have noticed. Think 'hermeneutic of continuity', who ever heard of that pre - V II?
The average Catholic is so dumbed down and ignorant of the Faith precisely due to the apostate clergy and worn down by the endless scandals from the droves of religious leaving in the ‘60’s up to the sexual deviant clergy many learned of in the ‘90’s and everything in between from Vegas style ‘liturgies’ right up to Pachamama. Rome has destroyed the Faith of millions. ONLY a concerned and passionate laity can reverse the rot galloping through the Church.
You're pretty much right, though I would say that given the Internet, there should be less ignorance plus the grace of God must be factored in of course. But yes, the restoration of the Faith will be primarily from the laity waking up and getting serious, since it's beyond clear that it won't come from Rome.
While you cast stones at Traditional Catholics and question “What have they done?” after losing their Mass to an apostate bishop, I gotta ask… What have *you* done? 🙄 Dear Lord save us from the self-righteous and self-unaware chronic criticizers.
Thank you for revealing yourself. "Self-righteous", what about "sanctimonious" and "Pharisee", Mr. Network? Oh sorry, Hugh Mann...
Interesting quote, from the American Revolution... How many apostate bishops have you helped remove? What have YOU done that has made a real world difference for anyone trying to live out their faith? How many TLMs have you prevented from shutting down?
Pretty ironic, to have that quote as the intro to your Substack, and yet you call me (and others) "self-righteous" for simply telling facts?
When was the last time you attended a Traditional Latin Mass? Today? Last month? Anytime between December 8, 2002 and now? If you attended anytime after that date, consider yourself very fortunate.
Not everyone has the opportunity to attend whenever they like, so excuse me for thinking people who do should be willing to stand and fight to keep their TLM.
Interesting perspective, Chris. However, it's a dangerous assumption to believe that everyone shares the same sentiment. Isn't it possible that others might have different interpretations or reactions to what's being shared?
Many of the common faithful do, especially those who read the spin from the gatekeepers. The gatekeepers themselves, at least Trad Inc., had no problem criticizing Francis for the same things and know full well what is going on.
CJ says here "There are faithful priests too, even in the Novus Ordo."
That's basically a repeat of his comment in the comment space on the ice-blessing article, except that there he described them as "good devout priests even in the NO."
And yet, many commenters here say the NovusOrdo is rotten rotten rotten. So, is anything faithful or good or devout to be found there?? (As for me? - I'm inclined to agree with CJ.)
I’m learning of late on my own journey, with a bit of difficulty, to criticize the N.O. Protestant-lite liturgy without casting blame on N.O. parish Catholics and demeaning them with words like “pew sitters.” I have to humble myself and remember that, not too long ago, I was one of them. All we can do is continue to loudly call out the hypocrisy and challenge the lies, heresies and apostasies. The Catholic leftist ideologues will continue to fight us. But the faithful misled will come around, one at a time. If not them, then their children. The youthful rush to the TLM would indicate this is already happening.
The Vatican is leading, or attempting to lead, the Church further and further into the occult. The ice block ritual is New Age; there’s nothing Catholic about it. If so-called catholic commentators can’t see that, then they shouldn’t be writing Catholic apologetics.
I know from the experience of having been on both side of the fence that until one faces the music and acknowledges that Prevost is NOT the Vicar of Christ, nor his predecessors since V II, a Catholic cannot view the situation objectively. Regarding these imposters as true popes is what holds us back from viewing and exposing them for what they are instead of scrounging for excuses to justify or put aside their heresies and scandalous actions. It's all a masquerade whereby donning a white cassock and keeping two Swiss guards at one's side, keeps the faithful hoodwinked. It is a test of faith from on high and most Catholics are failing miserably.
The difficulty with the sedevacantist position is, once one adopts it, then what? The answers are as many and as varied as the number of sede Catholics. So, after one posts his 578th Substack Note informing the world that “Prevost isn’t a valid pope,” what’s his next move? 579? At what point does it dawn on a militant sede that he hasn’t made a case? He’s only made a claim. Chris Jackson’s Substack editorial approach is intellectually honest and true to the faith. Be sympathetic to the sede position, but first, make the case. Successfully made, the claim takes care of itself. Abp. Viganó is another living testament to this principal, and yet his battle against the V2 usurpers remains as uphill as anyone else’s. If Viganó simply skulked from venue to venue crying “Prevost isn’t pope” without his ecclesiastical authority, his inside knowledge, and saintly humility, he’d just have been written off as a crackpot, rather than become a feared and banished white martyr. It’s not simply a matter of being right. It’s a matter of being heard. Evidence is heard. Claims are just pebbles on the social media beach.
I know you're not an atheist but I have to say that your verbiage reminds me so much of the atheist argument that our belief in the existence of God is merely a "claim." Sorry pal, I'm quite familiar with your mindset as well as that of the atheists. There is nothing on God's green earth that you will accept as a "case" for sede vacantism, just as that there is absolutely no evidence that the atheist will accept as a "case" that his divine Creator exists. I think you're just toying with semantics regarding this claim vs case business. This ain't my first rodeo with the anti sede crowd (which of course makes up 99% of Catholics). I literally believe that if Prevost were to order St Peter's razed to build some monstrosity like the basilica of Guadalupe in Mexico City or abolish recitation of the rosary or start ordaining women - you would still regard him as the "Vicar of Christ" and I mean that literally. If and when Jesus my Judge asks me when I die, "so did you believe that these men were truly my representatives?" I will say "no Lord, I did not." There you go Hugh. I rest my "case."
Yeah, "straw man" is another line that atheists use against believers! I've heard them say it dozens of times. Hmm, I'm beginning to wonder about you Hugh.
Not trying to be snide or tricky here, but if there've been no Popes in the last 67 years, then how would the math work out with no Popes to make bishops:
Say you had some validly ordained (by Pius XII) bishops who were 50 years old in 1960. So in 1985 they (the last valid batch) are all 75 years old, and they ordain valid Priests in 1985 who'd be maybe 28 years old then; those new Priests are now 68 years old here in 2025.
And if Prevost is still there in, say, 2035, then our remaining valid Priests are all at least age 78 then. Is the Church thus being left without Clergy? Is apostolic succession no longer a "mark" of the Church?
I admit there might be some logical error in there.
Oh I'll go you one better. The situation is probably gloomier than you might think. Most sedes will agree that the new ordination rite is doubtfully valid and that the new rite for consecrating bishops is definately invalid. However you, like R&Rs and/or popesplainers act as though God expects us to solve this conundrum. He knows we can't and desires that we trust in divine providence. Such is a test of faith and I have enough faith to trust in His will to bring a solution to the dilemma.
To take the anti sede position is the same as being in denial of Montini protestantizing the Mass. Of course at one time it was considered unthinkable, but facts are facts and he did do it, like or not. Same thing with sede vacantism. People regard it unthinkable that God would permit the throne of Peter to be vacant for however many years. Well I consider it unthinkable that God would permit his Son to be represented by some charlatan who would offer a pagan service to false idols under the dome of St Peter's, or to say "there is no Catholic God" or to say that "atheists can go to heaven" or offer buggery blessings or any litany of such unspeakable abominations.
Look at it this way, let's say these conciliar imposters have actually been and are true popes. Well if that's the case, what sense if there in having the papacy in the first place??
I'm not complaining, nor am I trying to convince anyone. I am merely trying to educate myself. (And if I learn some stuff, that does at least move the ball down MY field.)
In my comment above, I was simply trying to "game out" the sede position and see where it might go as the years proceed. I thought your comment above, asking "then what", and acknowledging "difficulty" in the sede position, was a good one; thus, I followed it up (and began by sincerely stating that I wasn't trying to be snide or tricky).
My earlier comment (regarding Novus Ordo) was trying to obtain some clarity for what appeared to me to be a mild disagreement between CJ and some of the commenters here.
Meaningless complaining and arguing would be a waste of everyone's time and also mine - I had/have no intent to do that.
The Church Medicated. Wow Chris. I'm trying but I can't even wake up my own Saturday Evening Novus Ordo going parents who instilled the true faith in me some 60 years ago.
Mom, I was baptized in the Latin Rite, you cried back in the 70's when they ripped apart our beautiful church and installed a brown totem pole as the tabernacle, you can pray both The Our Father and Hail Mary in Latin, you attended the TLM until you were 32 years old, your four boys are all baptized in the Latin rite, on and on. They listen and look right through me. Off to 5 pm Sat night NO. I tell them about all the sick news out of Rome. They tell me to lighten up. You take everything too serious. That Rome does not affect their faith. I've brought them to TLM. Mom remembers, she responds to the mass, but Sat night NO is just too darn convenient for them. It's also 45 minutes. They love Jesus Christ and Our Lady. Pray the Rosary. I'm disheartened Chris. This will indeed take an act of God to clean this mess up. At the same time Chris, never stop. I need your truth pill every morning.
There will always be a constant trickle of those who discover or rediscover the true (pre-VII) Catholic faith and TLM, but as you well point out it will not be a wholesale ground up laity inspired reestablishment. Sites like this will nourish those who adhere to Tradition, but it will take, against all human odds given the make-up of the cardinalate but not God's, the election of a truly Tradition minded pope (not a half-hearted one foot in Modernism one) to try to lead the vast majority of Catholics back, although many of those will fall out by refusing to return to the faith.
Indeed, and in order for that 'truly Tradition minded pope' to appear, will take God raising up someone 100% born for this particular job. Who will fear no-one because God is with him. The only question for me is whether Antichrist will appear him or after.
What you said about them looking right through you is due to the desensitizing effect the Bugnini rite has had on them over the decades. It's not just lack of incense, ceremony and Gregorian chant. It is a very insidious liturgy which is why the TLM is highly suppressed by Traditiones Custodes
Our priest also got rid of our beautiful choir whose repertoires and chants always matched/supported the liturgy. He claimed it was due to budget cuts (even though the church only paid a pittance to the choir director and four section leaders, while others were either volunteers or paid for by the choir director personally.)
It is truly absurd.
A priest mentioned that he was told at the Saturday afternoon Mass to shorten his sermons so they could take advantage of the early bird specials at restaurants!!!
‼️Sounds about right.
The priests head there too on Saturday nights
This sounds exactly like my parents too. They are boomers and definitely not going to change now. For many, switching to the TLM is a LIFESTYLE change. When you consider that these people have been going to the NO for 60 years, it’s no surprise the way they are.
This sounds exactly like my parents!
Thats my mission ,now that I'm retired. I go to other sites and try to wake-up ignorant catholic's ,and there's a lot of them ,to what going on. 60yrs ago ,I was fighting the same battle.It is a seductive take over of the masonic cabal ,that is very powerful and resourceful. CCD programs deliberately taught Fluff instead of the faith. Now we have generations that are disgustingly dumb concerning the catholic faith.If you honestly listen to whats coming out of Rome you can see the ambiguity,inversion of language to seem to mean something orthodox but mean something the opposite,a real satanic manipulation is highly present.We are dealing with the devil himself and need God's help to purge this crap from the Catholic Church.
The saying, "You will know them by their fruits" seems to be too hard for some. I guess that Ignorance is bliss for some people.
“You will know them by their fruits.”
Yes indeed we will. And yes indeed we do. 🍎🍐🍊🍋🍋🟩🍉🍇🍓🫐🍒🧚🏻🌈
Or you could just tell everybody the truth for once: Robert Prevost's election was null and void because of the 13 illegal extra electors who violated papal election law. That might wake people up.
But I don't even hear a whisper of that from the supposed 'truth tellers'.
I have heard even if it was improper it wouldn’t invalidate. Also universal peaceful acceptance would have come into play.
Universal Peaceful acceptance would not come into play because I never accepted the election. Neither did a number of people who see the same problems.
UPA only comes into play when it is a VALID election.
Breaking the law of the election process invalidates the conclave.
In what circumstances would a valid election require a 'Universal Peaceful acceptance' situation to come into play? If it's known to be valid, anyone opposing it would surely be irrelevant, anyway?
I don't know too much about this issue, just the basics, so any explanation you (or anyone else) can offer would be helpful.
A VALID election ALWAYS requires UPA.
In times past there were different rules for elections and at times got quite messy.
But Canon Law by JP2 in 1983 for an election is still in effect.
So the Law needs to be followed, anyone refusing is heretical.
Think I need to read it all up!
Dr. Edmund Mazza is doing a live (taped for later viewing) one day course on All Saints Day. His website is EdmondMazza.com
I haven’t accepted him. Listen they violated Universi Dominici Gregis no. 33 by having thirteen extra electors. And UDG no. 76 says if you violate the election law the election is null and void with no declaration needed so it doesn’t matter whether people accept him or not. The guy isn’t pope. Do with it what you want, but constantly complaining about the guy without addressing the root of the problem is not going to solve anything.
No defect or impediment resulting from a law of human or ecclesiastical origin can invalidate the papacy of a Catholic man who is universally recognized as Pope. Supplied Jurisdiction and Universal Peaceful Acceptance absolutely come into play.
However, the Church has no authority or ability to supply for an impediment created by divine law. (You have to be a sane, adult male Catholic in order to be the Pope)
https://www.fromrome.info/2025/10/05/while-attacking-trad-inc-jackson-swallows-a-whale/
You are clearly not Catholic, but insane!
The law states that an election conducted outside of the terms it prescribes is nullified. Since they chose to conduct this election outside of the law it is, legally speaking, as if the election never happened. The fact is that, legally speaking, there was no election and the sede vacante that began with the death of Francis on 21 April 2025 is still in effect.
Universal and peaceful acceptance is irrelevant. People can universally and peacefully accept that the sky is yellow but that does not make it so. All of this can be remedied by calling the Cardinals back to vote according to the provisions of the law, but first it has to be acknowledged what actually happened here before there is even the remotest chance of that.
Thanks for this post.
????
What about Francis's election? What about John XXIII thru Benedict? If one accepts these men as popes, he must accept & submit to all V2 & post-conciliar teaching, e.g. ecumenism & religious liberty, condemned by the pre-V2 Church, the novel collegiality, the Masonic & Modernist-inspired Novus Ordo, new laws & practices. "Recognize & Resist ("R&R") is not an option.
"Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: 'He who heareth you, heareth me'; and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians." - Pius XII, Humani Generis, 20
It is not possible for the pope to err in such a way that he would universally and authoritatively teach error in faith or morals, that he should give the Church harmful rites, or that he should establish universal laws and disciplines that are intrinsically harmful to souls.
See novusordowatch.org/2025/01/binding-force-of-papal-teaching-john-cronin
I’m going to hark back to Malachi Martin’s book “The Jesuits “.
I was reading it yesterday. I had to put the book down because of its clarity on the horrors of VII when it was introduced. And I mean horrors!
The majority of us have all been affected and accepting of the horrors. No more!!!! No more!!!
Blessed be Jesus Whose mother is MARY!!!
Perseverance!!!
I'm reading his book "The Vatican" right now. Excellent!
Francis’ election was invalid because Benedict never actually resigned the Munus as per canon law and therefore there was never a valid resignation.
Benedict was an Artful Dodger and a Modernist and not a Pope of the Catholic Church but a Pope of the Concilliar church
In a recent youtube of What Catholics Believe, Fr Jenkins SSPV details an eye opening expose of how the roles of these papal imposters correlated as the antithesis and thesis to form the synthesis. I can't explain it well but it was one of those things wherein you're hearing something, you know that person is making logical sense.
That makes sense, since the Hegelian dialectic is in Marxism, which is Judeo-Masonic, & the V2 religion is under Judeo-Masonic control.
The pope has the power to greatly harm the church!!
Funny business at the Leo conclave would make for a fascinating news story for sure. As would the truth about Benedict's resignation and the Francis shoo-in. But they wouldn't change a thing.
It'd be like the tumbleweed aftermath of Diane Montagna's trad mass survey exposé.
While the man in the pew continues to view the Pope as some kind of Catholic CEO he will accept and even expect some backroom wheeler-dealing. Especially as some of that wheeler-dealing is now coming from traditional Catholic quarters as they attempt to reinstate the mass.
Clarity will come not from focusing on the conclaves, trying to pinpoint 'patient zero' as it were, but through showing that the heresy and humanism falling from Leo's lips mean that he cannot logically be the Pope. The chair of St Peter is the only post on Earth established by Our Lord; its occupant has one job and is guided by the Holy Spirit who cannot contradict Himself.
Now if a reporter could buttonhole Leo and ask if he really fits this description, that would be worth capturing on film...
Francis and Bendict are dead. Prevost is alive and needs to be dealt with. Besides the evidence here is infinitely better than with Francis.
And if it does no good to point out that he was invalidly elected then what is the point in throwing a hissy fit because he blesses a block of ice or congratulates some woman in England?
The frog in boiling water analogy. Turn up the heat slowly and the frog never knew what hit him. I was born in 1953 and made my communion in 1961 just before the Vatican 2 big boy went off. We were taught in grade school never ever question the authority of any priest, bishop, or pope. That was fine when the church was united and heretics weeded out. Today its still used as a trump card to keep Catholics in line. The priest who taught me religion in high school wearing a pair of dockers and golf shirt was ask "Father if you didn't have to read mass on Sunday would you go?" He said no so I stopped going. Sermon of a priest in our parish said if your only going to confession with venial sins your wasting the priest time. So I stopped going to confession. If Father said it was ok then it must be ok. I never thought just did what they said was ok. It was not until I returned to the Latin mass in the early 80s with a crusty old Irish priest that I began to think about what I was doing. I think thats the trouble with most Novus Ordo Catholics today. Never doubt or question what the clergy tell you and most don't know what a heresy is so its like the blues brothers, "Just play a standard set".
Your story is strikingly similar to mine. I was born in '54 and remember the pre conciliar Church well but in my foolish adolescence I wound up playing guitar at the folk masses. I was in no way a modernist and wasn't concerned with ecclesiastical matters but merely went along with the flow. Then in l980 I saw an ad in the paper for an ORCM Latin Mass which was held at the Tucson Community Center and never looked back. It was like stepping onto a time machine. I became active in SSPX, attended diocesan indult Masses, FSSP, ICK, and eventually joined the SSPX resistance - Marian Corps. I got fed up with their insistence that no matter what, these papal imposters were and are true sovereign pontiffs. Finally I joined the sede camp. It's amazing how we gravitate towards the ultimate truth over the decades. What you said about "never doubt or question" reminds me of the words of Marcel Lefebvre: "Satan's masterstroke was to sow disobedience through obedience."
A prime example of the boiling frog is the gay phenomenon. In conditioning the public to eventually accept the agenda they first had to de classify homosexuality as a mental disorder as was done in l973, (same year as Roe v Wade oddly enough). Then followed the gay "rights" movement and making words as "fag" politically incorrect and taboo. This came along with legislation prohibiting "discrimination" against sodomites and lezzies. Gradually the idea of same sex unions arrived until it became legal everywhere with the Supreme Court's approval. Now the transgender madness and mutilation of children's bodies along with drag queen story hour which is ultimately paving the way for legalized sex with children. I shudder at the though of seeing it in my lifetime and fear for what's ahead for my grandchildren. Yup, the queers should have been stopped at the NYC Stonewall rebellion in '69. That's when the genie was let out of the bottle. I am convinced that the propaganda machine has the power to condition most people to accept any degree of evil, and I mean any. As long as the Jooz control the MSM and Hollywood it's a sure bet that things will only get worse. I hate this world and don't understand why the divine chastisement hasn't yet befallen this wicked society.
Rome has lost the faith. Who doesn't see that?
100%
Unfortunately millions and millions of Catholics.
100% true
I hope that something good comes out of this evil that is among us.
We are helpless without the grace of the Almighty.
Waking up to this sad reality is very painful but I would rather be in pain than not feel pain while sleeping in “blissful” falsehood.
For someone who has believed the lies of this world, one of which being the measure of success is having power and money, and influence, and education, and friends, it will be very difficult to want to accept reality:
We are nothing without God.
We were made in His own image and likeness.
We were purchased by the unstained blood of Christ.
We are instructed the order by which we should live through the power of Holy Ghost through our Church.
And if the church and it’s so called leaders are teaching falsehood, we know that it is not of God, rather is a false church with false teachings, false doctrines, false preachers — all abhorrent in the eyes of God.
Therefore, this false church has no authority over us.
I'm sorry to have to say this, but I have to disagree with Mr. Jackson on his "sleeping giant" theory. Something like 70ish % of so-called "Catholics" don't believe in the Real Presence of Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament, which means they aren't Catholic at all. Even among the 30ish % left, it's still a minority who even care about the reality of the Crisis in the Church. 30 or 40 years ago, that theory might have made some sense, but in the Internet age? If these "sleeping giant" people are so devoted the Blessed Sacrament and the Rosary, why can't they see the truth?
Look at the Trad world... So many "see the Truth" about the Crisis in the Church, yet no matter how many TLMs get shut down, what do the Trads do? Not much. Pray the Rosary, etc. which is all well and good and needed, but when it comes to action? Not so much. Oh, some will help build a chapel or other related things like the folks in Virginia after their TLM was shut down and they had to move to a gym. Good on those folks, but their TLM was driven out of its natural home by an apostate bishop who should have been tossed into the street, and I mean literally. Just like all these apostate bishops should have been.
Where was this "sleeping giant" in 2002 when all the revelations of sexual abuse of teenage boys (for the most part) were an almost daily occurrence, when the mainstream media was having a field day trashing the Church and faithful priests and laity because of the sick actions of a minority of bishops and priests who were involved? If that wasn't enough to get people to take action against these apostate bishops and priests, NOTHING will be enough.
Let's not forget, even among many Trads, OBEDIENCE has become the ultimate virtue. That's why these apostate bishops can do what they want and can get away with it, because they know that all they have to do is say 'obedience' and pretty much every Catholic will cave in faster than a house of cards in a hurricane.
Sorry Mr. Jackson, I agree with you 99 + % of the time because you have a habit of spittin' facts, plain and simple. But on this particular ("sleeping giant") point alone, I think you are way off.
I would be perfectly fine being proven wrong, but I think there's a better chance of me winning the Powerball twice in a row...
There was that heroic minority in the Diocese of Springfield Illinois who struggled to get rid of their appalling Bishop Daniel Ryan. He used to cruise the red light district to pick up rentboys. That was well before 2002.
They even sent a delegate to Rome begging for action. Much good any of it did them. In fact, as you can see from this old clipping, they were blamed for trying to short circuit the proper procedure, which is the Pope's prerogative.
https://www.illinoistimes.com/news-opinion/the-continuing-saga-of-brady-and-the-bishop-11443110/
The only effective thing they could do was use publicity, including the early Internet. Which certainly earned them no fans among the Midwest bishops.
Ryan finally got a punishment which partially fitted his crimes. One of his rentboys gave a detailed description of his luxury apartment and naked body....
The late Fr John O'Connor (not to be confused with the Archbishop of New York) many years ago had the real dirt on whom he called "homo bishop Ryan." He also boldly exposed the Yids and was regarded as persona non grata. Back then they weren't called cancelled priests yet. He was one priest in a million, literally.
Yes, I remember a lot of that, there was that website rcf.org (still online) that detailed all that. Stephen Brady and other folks fought hard to get that scumbag bishop removed, and it should have been much simpler to accomplish that...
What we need is people with more of the spirit of Mr. Brady and his like minded associates, and far less of the mentality of Mr. Network.
This is a tad off subject but after debating with hundreds of atheists on facebook I've noticed that NEVER will they decry pedophilia when it concerns a secular source e.g. NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association) ;the Hollywood child sex trafficking rings; Epstein files: drag queen story hour; least of all the repulsive Rabbinical foreskin fetish upon infant boys. They only denounce child molestation when it concerns the priesthood.
Not really off-topic that much, but I can't say I'm surprised by what you said. That sort of thing just the way certain kinds of people work...
No wonder that atheists have no coherent objections to sexual abuse of children. Carson Holloway wrote a very depressing article years ago: Dare we get real about sex? His grim conclusion was no, most of us dare not get real.
https://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=15-03-031-f
The vast majority of nice respectable married middle class church going Americans and West Europeans had no coherent objection to child abuse. Yes, they might lynch a paedo who came anywhere near their children. But they were using contraception and had severed the link between sex and procreation. They had opened the way to purely recreational sex, and could not children enjoy that as much as adults?
But a child can't meaningfully consent to such a grave matter. Who says? Holloway opens the earth beneath us in a few simple arguments so I felt I was dropping into Hell. Unfortunately his article is behind a paywall as it is so uncomfortable and thought provoking.
Yes, the atheists were being inconsistent in using the emotive topic of child abuse just as a weapon to attack the Church. But the logic is that anyone can have sex with a child if the child consents. Carson could see no way out of this hell without returning to full traditional Christian morality.
I keep hearing from so many sources about the great numbers of Catholics who no longer believe in the real presence but my question is why should we be surprised? For decades we've seen less and less reverence for and visibility of tabernacles, much less exposition of the Blessed Sacrament. Stashing the tabernacle in a corner or even in a separate chapel (as in Chicago's Holy Name Cathedral); removing communion rails; lay "ministers," communion in the hand; no longer kneeling to receive the Holy Eucharist - and even that! Almost always it is just referred to as "the Eucharist," and rarely the former. Priests no longer stress that receiving Holy Communion in mortal sin is a sacrilege. Why should they? Aren't they already treating it as mere bread? The Church has become protestant and guess what? Protties don't believe in transubstantiation, so why should the Novus Ordo? Duh, so what else is new?
Exactly. You're absolutely right about all of it.
And that is one of my pet peeves these days... What is this obsession with the term "the Eucharist"? Even some 'Trads' use the term. Apparently it was used in the past, but in this day and age, people who really believe in it shouldn't be caught dead using anything but Holy Eucharist or Blessed Eucharist. What's next? The Blessed Sacrament being referred to as just ' the sacrament'?
You mean what they used to always call “the Holy Eucharist?” It’s all subtle verbal engineering.
Yes, but I have seen the term 'the Eucharist' in even pre-V II writings, not often but it has happened. Example, in books that are written by or compiled from writings of St. Peter Julian Eymard, which I find very odd.
As you said, "It’s all subtle verbal engineering". That is very true. Also in writing as I'm sure you have noticed. Think 'hermeneutic of continuity', who ever heard of that pre - V II?
The average Catholic is so dumbed down and ignorant of the Faith precisely due to the apostate clergy and worn down by the endless scandals from the droves of religious leaving in the ‘60’s up to the sexual deviant clergy many learned of in the ‘90’s and everything in between from Vegas style ‘liturgies’ right up to Pachamama. Rome has destroyed the Faith of millions. ONLY a concerned and passionate laity can reverse the rot galloping through the Church.
You're pretty much right, though I would say that given the Internet, there should be less ignorance plus the grace of God must be factored in of course. But yes, the restoration of the Faith will be primarily from the laity waking up and getting serious, since it's beyond clear that it won't come from Rome.
While you cast stones at Traditional Catholics and question “What have they done?” after losing their Mass to an apostate bishop, I gotta ask… What have *you* done? 🙄 Dear Lord save us from the self-righteous and self-unaware chronic criticizers.
Thank you for revealing yourself. "Self-righteous", what about "sanctimonious" and "Pharisee", Mr. Network? Oh sorry, Hugh Mann...
Interesting quote, from the American Revolution... How many apostate bishops have you helped remove? What have YOU done that has made a real world difference for anyone trying to live out their faith? How many TLMs have you prevented from shutting down?
Pretty ironic, to have that quote as the intro to your Substack, and yet you call me (and others) "self-righteous" for simply telling facts?
When was the last time you attended a Traditional Latin Mass? Today? Last month? Anytime between December 8, 2002 and now? If you attended anytime after that date, consider yourself very fortunate.
Not everyone has the opportunity to attend whenever they like, so excuse me for thinking people who do should be willing to stand and fight to keep their TLM.
Now aren’t you glad you got that off your chest? 🙄
😂😂😂😂😂😂
I agree!
As always refreshing to read your thoughts. My mistake: assuming everyone else who does feels the same way.
Interesting perspective, Chris. However, it's a dangerous assumption to believe that everyone shares the same sentiment. Isn't it possible that others might have different interpretations or reactions to what's being shared?
Many of the common faithful do, especially those who read the spin from the gatekeepers. The gatekeepers themselves, at least Trad Inc., had no problem criticizing Francis for the same things and know full well what is going on.
Thank you Chris! Once again a great article!
CJ says here "There are faithful priests too, even in the Novus Ordo."
That's basically a repeat of his comment in the comment space on the ice-blessing article, except that there he described them as "good devout priests even in the NO."
And yet, many commenters here say the NovusOrdo is rotten rotten rotten. So, is anything faithful or good or devout to be found there?? (As for me? - I'm inclined to agree with CJ.)
I’m learning of late on my own journey, with a bit of difficulty, to criticize the N.O. Protestant-lite liturgy without casting blame on N.O. parish Catholics and demeaning them with words like “pew sitters.” I have to humble myself and remember that, not too long ago, I was one of them. All we can do is continue to loudly call out the hypocrisy and challenge the lies, heresies and apostasies. The Catholic leftist ideologues will continue to fight us. But the faithful misled will come around, one at a time. If not them, then their children. The youthful rush to the TLM would indicate this is already happening.
Our credulity is being stretched to the breaking point.
I appreciate any article that begins with a Leslie Nielsen meme!
Excellent, spot on article!!!
The Vatican is leading, or attempting to lead, the Church further and further into the occult. The ice block ritual is New Age; there’s nothing Catholic about it. If so-called catholic commentators can’t see that, then they shouldn’t be writing Catholic apologetics.
I know from the experience of having been on both side of the fence that until one faces the music and acknowledges that Prevost is NOT the Vicar of Christ, nor his predecessors since V II, a Catholic cannot view the situation objectively. Regarding these imposters as true popes is what holds us back from viewing and exposing them for what they are instead of scrounging for excuses to justify or put aside their heresies and scandalous actions. It's all a masquerade whereby donning a white cassock and keeping two Swiss guards at one's side, keeps the faithful hoodwinked. It is a test of faith from on high and most Catholics are failing miserably.
The difficulty with the sedevacantist position is, once one adopts it, then what? The answers are as many and as varied as the number of sede Catholics. So, after one posts his 578th Substack Note informing the world that “Prevost isn’t a valid pope,” what’s his next move? 579? At what point does it dawn on a militant sede that he hasn’t made a case? He’s only made a claim. Chris Jackson’s Substack editorial approach is intellectually honest and true to the faith. Be sympathetic to the sede position, but first, make the case. Successfully made, the claim takes care of itself. Abp. Viganó is another living testament to this principal, and yet his battle against the V2 usurpers remains as uphill as anyone else’s. If Viganó simply skulked from venue to venue crying “Prevost isn’t pope” without his ecclesiastical authority, his inside knowledge, and saintly humility, he’d just have been written off as a crackpot, rather than become a feared and banished white martyr. It’s not simply a matter of being right. It’s a matter of being heard. Evidence is heard. Claims are just pebbles on the social media beach.
I know you're not an atheist but I have to say that your verbiage reminds me so much of the atheist argument that our belief in the existence of God is merely a "claim." Sorry pal, I'm quite familiar with your mindset as well as that of the atheists. There is nothing on God's green earth that you will accept as a "case" for sede vacantism, just as that there is absolutely no evidence that the atheist will accept as a "case" that his divine Creator exists. I think you're just toying with semantics regarding this claim vs case business. This ain't my first rodeo with the anti sede crowd (which of course makes up 99% of Catholics). I literally believe that if Prevost were to order St Peter's razed to build some monstrosity like the basilica of Guadalupe in Mexico City or abolish recitation of the rosary or start ordaining women - you would still regard him as the "Vicar of Christ" and I mean that literally. If and when Jesus my Judge asks me when I die, "so did you believe that these men were truly my representatives?" I will say "no Lord, I did not." There you go Hugh. I rest my "case."
Straw man nonsense. Bye.
Yeah, "straw man" is another line that atheists use against believers! I've heard them say it dozens of times. Hmm, I'm beginning to wonder about you Hugh.
Not trying to be snide or tricky here, but if there've been no Popes in the last 67 years, then how would the math work out with no Popes to make bishops:
Say you had some validly ordained (by Pius XII) bishops who were 50 years old in 1960. So in 1985 they (the last valid batch) are all 75 years old, and they ordain valid Priests in 1985 who'd be maybe 28 years old then; those new Priests are now 68 years old here in 2025.
And if Prevost is still there in, say, 2035, then our remaining valid Priests are all at least age 78 then. Is the Church thus being left without Clergy? Is apostolic succession no longer a "mark" of the Church?
I admit there might be some logical error in there.
Oh I'll go you one better. The situation is probably gloomier than you might think. Most sedes will agree that the new ordination rite is doubtfully valid and that the new rite for consecrating bishops is definately invalid. However you, like R&Rs and/or popesplainers act as though God expects us to solve this conundrum. He knows we can't and desires that we trust in divine providence. Such is a test of faith and I have enough faith to trust in His will to bring a solution to the dilemma.
To take the anti sede position is the same as being in denial of Montini protestantizing the Mass. Of course at one time it was considered unthinkable, but facts are facts and he did do it, like or not. Same thing with sede vacantism. People regard it unthinkable that God would permit the throne of Peter to be vacant for however many years. Well I consider it unthinkable that God would permit his Son to be represented by some charlatan who would offer a pagan service to false idols under the dome of St Peter's, or to say "there is no Catholic God" or to say that "atheists can go to heaven" or offer buggery blessings or any litany of such unspeakable abominations.
Look at it this way, let's say these conciliar imposters have actually been and are true popes. Well if that's the case, what sense if there in having the papacy in the first place??
Is any of your online complaining and straw man arguing moving the ball down the field? Who are to trying to convince?
I'm not complaining, nor am I trying to convince anyone. I am merely trying to educate myself. (And if I learn some stuff, that does at least move the ball down MY field.)
In my comment above, I was simply trying to "game out" the sede position and see where it might go as the years proceed. I thought your comment above, asking "then what", and acknowledging "difficulty" in the sede position, was a good one; thus, I followed it up (and began by sincerely stating that I wasn't trying to be snide or tricky).
My earlier comment (regarding Novus Ordo) was trying to obtain some clarity for what appeared to me to be a mild disagreement between CJ and some of the commenters here.
Meaningless complaining and arguing would be a waste of everyone's time and also mine - I had/have no intent to do that.