Those people who keep on repeating that the Pope and other lawful superiors have no authority over the Catholic flock.
Of course, they do. Catholics simply await a Pope. But when elected/elevated, Catholics owe him their obedience. And lawful bishops, etc.
But a bishop who teaches against The Church, who is precisely what Pope St. Pius X said a Catholic cannot be in his effort to stem the tide of Modernism, cannot be a Catholic. If a heretic or apostate, he can't either be a bishop or demand any obedience from Catholics. It would be as if Louis Farrakhan suddenly demanded a tithe from the CMRI. The CMRI don't answer to 'Calypso Louie'.
And above all, the dire need to pray to Almighty God and the Blessed Mother for the regaining of the whole Catholic Church its four distinctive marks: One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic!
And you believe Roman Protestantism meets even one of those four tests?
In what way?
One? They don't consider themselves one, but part of a separated group of 'brethren', a co-equal 'sister congregation', and so forth. Holy? In what way? Holiness hardly seems esteemed, even at that, in Roman Protestantism. Modernism does not allow for the supernatural, for grace, really for God. Again, read what Pope St. Pius X wrote on this. I suspect you haven't. Catholic? The Church contemns Modernism. There's no 'gray area', here. Apostolic? I give you an example. If a Protestant is 'grandfathered' in as a priest, even as a married vicar, without even conditional orders, how does he follow in the line? And what about the changes made to Holy Orders, I believe in 1968, the first of the Sacraments to be remade in the image Roman Protestantism? Without proper orders, whence Apostolic Succession?