They were wrong. And because they did not stop at addressing them, they were wrong. And by "resisting him to his face," they were wrong.

In your opinion.

The split between the Nine and the sspx was caused by both sides wanting things their way. 

I'm not sure it was just about having "their" way.  They had disagreements over principles.  That's understandable given the vacuum of real Church authority.  But both sides could have just agreed to disagree and dealt with one another with a certain amount of civility.  "I'm not a sedevacantist, but I'm not going to hold it against you, since the Church hasn't resolved the issue.  We can't really work together as a result, but it's not personal and I don't hold any grudges."

Well, if we go by what we see, which is the SSPX is still ordaining priests the right way, still celebrating Mass the right way, still administering the sacraments, counseling, instructing, preaching and on on, same as before, during and after "the Nine," it pretty much makes the whole thing superfluous. What did they accomplish?

"ordaining priests the right way" - Yes, they do, but they accept priests that were not ordained the right way.

"preaching and on on, same as before" - Not really.

"What did they accomplish?" - If nothing else, they have congregations that work without doubtful sacraments. And that is a lot, considering the situation we live in.

The SSPX has always accepted Novus Ordo priests to join the SSPX. Always and since the beginning. Sometimes they are conditionally ordained, and sometimes not. Why did any of the Nine join the SSPX in the first place (seminary), when they surely knew that this is how the SSPX did, and still does things?

Perhaps they just needed a variety of excuses to leave the SSPX and take properties and faithful with them, after they were able to secure their own ordination.

I don't believe that things were so clear back them. Plus, this is probably the kind of thing that you only get to know when it happens to you. I mean, they probably had not even considered that Apb. Lefebvre would accept doubtful priets before they were forced to deal with one in their district.

As far a reordaining a Novus Ordo priest who wants to join the SSPX, the SSPX has always judged it the same way. Research into how the prospective priest was ordained is thoroughly done. Those of us who have attended SSPX chapels for a long time, and who know the history of the SSPX will affirm this. I can't believe that the Nine would not have known this prior to them joining the SSPX seminary. They must have known. And yet they complained about it after their ordination, and not before.

Most of the “nine” didn’t join in the 80s. Remember the split was in ‘83. Bishop Clarence Kelly, for example, joined the SSPX in 1971- Fr. Cekada in 1975 after being a Cistercian. Bishop Dolan had a similar beginning with the SSPX as well. Many held positions of authority in the US district also.

I don’t think that after only a few years of existence (of the SSPX) or less that these priests would have been able to know all the positions and situations of the SSPX and plan to join them just “to get ordained”. It would be very rash and imprudent to publicly accuse them of this. When people joined the SSPX in the early ‘70s it was mostly because they saw it as the only organization where they could have the integral Catholic Faith. To state anything different is disingenuous. 

"ordaining priests the right way" - Yes, they do, but they accept priests that were not ordained the right way.

"preaching and on on, same as before" - Not really.

"What did they accomplish?" - If nothing else, they have congregations that work without doubtful sacraments. And that is a lot, considering the situation we live in.

Yes, yes, we all know the problems the SSPX has. I was merely pointing out that the reason the nine were expelled turned out to be for nothing at all. The whole scandalous mess accomplished division, that's "the Nine's" only claim to fame.

And yes really, nothing. They're the same regarding ordinations / accepting some NO ordinations pre to post the nine. Same with preaching. Some priests are better preachers than others, same as always and same no matter the group. 

Most of the “nine” didn’t join in the 80s. Remember the split was in ‘83. Bishop Clarence Kelly, for example, joined the SSPX in 1971- Fr. Cekada in 1975 after being a Cistercian. Bishop Dolan had a similar beginning with the SSPX as well. Many held positions of authority in the US district also.

I don’t think that after only a few years of existence (of the SSPX) or less that these priests would have been able to know all the positions and situations of the SSPX and plan to join them just “to get ordained”. It would be very rash and imprudent to publicly accuse them of this. When people joined the SSPX in the early ‘70s it was mostly because they saw it as the only organization where they could have the integral Catholic Faith. To state anything different is disingenuous.

That's correct.  The Nine point out in their letter that the previous General Chapter had basically endorsed some of their positions.  Things changed in the early 1980s after Wojtyla was elected, because +Lefebvre was more hopeful that Wojtyla might turn the course back toward Tradition.  There were two priests, I believe, who were accused of "stealing" the priesthood, but they too were already several years into seminary before all these changes took place.  I don't know of anyone who JOINED SSPX just to leave.  So those two entered the Seminary under one set of rules, and then were supposed to leave after having completed 4-5 years there?  For them, the terms of their ordination were changed toward the very end, which would be very unjust to deny them ordination after they had been there 5 years and then YOU suddenly changed your mind about your various positions.