CathInfo.com

seems to me that the SSPX position(at least as it's presented in the U.S today) is untenable. A few points to demonstrate
1. The SSPX says the Church can officially promulgate heretical theology and an evil Mass/evil disciplines
2. Pre-Vatican 2 theologians are clear that this is not possible. Look at any pre-V2 manual of ecclesiology and it will say that the Church is infallible on liturgy and discipline.
3. the SSPX usually responds to the above by saying that these pre-V2 theologians could not have foreseen the current Crisis. That's not really an answer though( it's merely a private opinion)
4. The modern Popes ( or anti-Popes, depending on how one looks at it) have made it clear that V2 is obligatory. Look at this short piece from Fr. Cekada

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjM6KeY_-r5AhV9LFkFHXKADpIQFnoECAsQAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.traditionalmass.org%2Farticles%2Farticle.php%3Fid%3D105&usg=AOvVaw3_BYVm92vxd-dsIIcxXWBS


I've had SSPX priests tell me that the Pope is the universal teacher of mankind, but that we don't need to listen to a thing he says if it's not in line with Tradition. That line of thinking is nowhere in pre-V2 manuals.

You can't have it both ways. If the neo-SSPX is going to insist that Francis is ABSOLUTELY Pope( with no room for doubt and no nuance) they must submit to him. I'm not saying all forms of R&R are untenable ( far from it) Fr. Chazal's position( which states that the modern Popes are all heretics with no authority awaiting deposition ) is perfectly orthodox. Fr. Chazal's position and the Sedeprivationist Thesis are really the only coherent positions on the Crisis.

What all Trads need to agree on is that Francis has no authority, period. Once we rob him of his supposed authority, his heresies will have No effect on us.

The problem with the neo-SSPX is that they give the modern claimants to the Papacy authority.

Where am I wrong?

You can't have it both ways. If the neo-SSPX is going to insist that Francis is ABSOLUTELY Pope( with no room for doubt and no nuance) they must submit to him. I'm not saying all forms of R&R are untenable ( far from it) Fr. Chazal's position( which states that the modern Popes are all heretics with no authority awaiting deposition ) is perfectly orthodox. Fr. Chazal's position and the Sedeprivationist Thesis are really the only coherent positions on the Crisis.

Fr. Chazal's position is contrary to VI. It's not tenable. The truth is, a heretic is not a member of the Church, therefore, a heretic cannot be it's visible Head.

Pope Pius IX, Vatican I, 1870, Sess. 4, Chap. 3, ex cathedra: “If anyone thus speaks, that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church… let him be anathema.” (Denz. 1831)

You clearly don’t understand the position.

No one does.