How many CENTURIES did it take for the Church to settle the debate on the immaculate conception?  Debate started in the 1200s and the dogma was defined in the late 1800s, so that's 600 years.  An orthodox hierarchy/pope does not mean that disputes/agendas will not exist.

Even St. Peter and St. Paul argued, something about circuмcision, I believe.  There has and will always be "friendly" arguments within the Church even with a Pope.
  
You mentioned the Immaculate Conception during  the time when  St. Thomas Aquinas one of a few theological opponents;  these debates did not split the Church, and perhaps God wanted those issues they brought up mentioned during that time, however in Gods perfect timing when things might have been getting "hotter" the Good Pope in happier days spoke out.  St. Thomas et al. "Rome has spoken."

The only thing you hear these days from Rome is heresy instead of your pope coming out to solve any problems he keeps adding fuel to the fire.
That is not my idea of God's REPRESENTATIVE on earth, in fact, that is an insult to God.  The fruits of this are what God warned us about, the fruits of your guy are not good.

2.  The disarray, in-fighting and chaos CAUSED and PROMOTED BY 95% of trad priests/bishops, who, in the face of no hierarchy, spent their time trying to grow a movement, instead of growing the Faith.

Id say 95% of trad clerics are part of organized groups.  All trad groups

1) are opposed to each other,
2) hold different views on the “speculative theology topics of the day” (NFP, BOD, Sedevactism, V2/new mass),
3) consider all other groups to be in error, and
4) rarely, if ever, work together, as evidenced by each having their own seminaries, chapels and schools.  

All of the above facts cause division, promote discord and prohibit the growth of traditionalism.  Most of the blame is on the leadership of the groups, and not on the individual priests, who can’t be blamed for the policies of said group.  The leaders have a responsibility to preach the faith, spread the mass and teach families, not push agendas and grow their membership.  

Most priests naturally care for the group they belong to and most perform many sacrifices for their flocks, but they will also naturally absorb their group’s mentality and thus, be an agent of division, even if indirectly.  (Americans can’t help but “pick sides” and have a sports-minded “I win, you lose” attitude.  This anti-catholic ideal has permeated American traditionalism unfortunately).  But, again, most of the blame goes to the leadership of these groups (some are more guilty than others).

If simple priests of these groups were allowed to collaborate, I’ll bet many would.  Why do some cities need 4-5 masses a Sunday (ie Cincinnati, St Mary’s, Post Falls), and each said by a different group, while people in other cities have only 1 mass a month?  There are many examples like this.  If providing the mass/sacraments were the main priority, then groups would work together.  Instead they compete for laity, and for the # of chapels on their websites.  The laity will never get along unless the leaders at the top do so first.  

We all need to pray for unity.

We all need to pray for unity.