One day, maybe soon, the See of Rome could become vacant. There have been several false popes, or anti-popes, in Church history. Again, for our own times, or times not far off, Our Lady warned us at La Salette that Rome will become the Seat of the Anti-Christ. It is quite possible that with the death of John Paul II (which may not be far off) there will be a vacant See of Rome or an anti-Pope for a while.

"Rome has lost the Faith, my dear friends. Rome is in apostasy. It is not just words, it is not just words in the air that I say to you. It is the truth. Rome is in apostasy. One cannot have confidence any more in this world. He [the pope] has left the Church; they have left the Church; they are leaving the Church. It is sure, sure, sure!"
I do not say that the pope is not the pope, but I do not say either that you cannot say that the pope is not the pope." --Archbishop Lefebvre, to his American priests, 1979

"The See of Peter and posts of authority in Rome being occupied by Antichrists, the destruction of the Kingdom of Our Lord is being rapidly carried out even with His Mystical Body here below" (Letter Attributed to Archbishop Lefebvre
Feast of St. Augustine, August 29, 1987.)

"The current state of the papacy renders insignificant the difficulties over jurisdiction, disobedience and apostolicity, because these notions suppose the reign of a pope Catholic in his faith and government. Without entering into consideration of the consequences of an heretical, schismatic or non-existent pope, which would lead to interminable theoretical discussions, in conscience could we not and ought we not, after the promulgation of the 1983 Code of Carton Law which clearly affirms the new Church, and after his scandalous declarations concerning Luther, now affirm that Pope John Paul II is not Catholic? We say no more, but we say no less. We had waited for the measure to become full, and it is so henceforth."

The sedevacantist honestly recognizes that his faith is actually not the same asJohn Paul II and his Conciliar Church. He recognizes that he is actually not subject and obedient to John Paul II. As a traditional Catholic, the sedevacantist believes and professes all the teachings of the Catholic Church, and this profession of the true Faith includes a rejection of the false teachings of Vatican II (“all already condemned by the Church in many a docuмent, official and definitive” — Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, June 29, 1976).

But I think the Pope can do nothing worse than call together a meeting of all religions, when we know there is only one true religion and all other religions belong to the devil. So perhaps after this famous meeting of Assisi, perhaps we must say that the Pope is a heretic, is apostate. Now I don't wish yet to say it formally and solemnly, but it seems at first sight that it is impossible for a Pope to be publicly and formally heretical. Our Lord has promised to be with him, to keep his faith, to keep him in the Faith - how can he at the same time be a public heretic and virtually apostatise? So it is possible we may be obliged to believe this pope is not pope.

Bergoglio would have helped the Archbishop deal effectively with his indecisiveness. Of that I am convinced.

On an earlier thread, I was arguing with SeanJohnson, and I pointed out to him the fact that +Lefebvre was quite sympathetic to sedevacantism, but he denied it.  After I produced the quotes, he stormed off the thread and then left CI for a time.

If even increasing numbers of people within the Novus Ordo are beginning to question whether or not Francis is a heretic, I think it's very unlikely that +Lefebvre would not have come out an open sedevacantist, with his one reservation being that only the Church can definitively settle the issue.  

If ABL might have suspended his SV tendencies had Bergoglion simply formally opened the door of return, then shame on him.    

I don't know how +Lefebvre would reason through this, but I will say, while Francis certainly says more problematic things than his predecessors, he by pure happenstance seems to be better for trads who want to be in communion with him than JPII was.  Mostly because he's too progressive to actually really want to force people to agree with him.

At this point the SSPX is PRACTICALLY regularized and Francis isn't seriously trying to persecute them.  

To be clear this isn't a defense of the man, actually listening to his teaching would be dangerous, but he's not attempting to excommunicate anyone for not doing so.

Whereas John Paul II was actively suppressing the Latin Mass and actively only allowing it to people who were also OK with the Novus Ordo.

So I don't know how +Lefebvre would reason through that issue.  For all I know he might be like "it actually doesn't matter anymore" or something (Sedevacantism, not Traditionalism.)

That said, I seriously doubt he'd bind sedevacantism on people, even if he did personally conclude that it seemed more likely.

And with Francis' stacked deck, the next "pope" will make Francis look like Pius V.

But when Assissi happened, that's when +Lefebvre came within a hair's breadth of becoming an open sedevacantist.  Bergoglio makes Wojtyla look like St. Pius X by comparison.

How about because it was not a fact, and wasn’t true?

Perhaps the man who had expelled “the 9” only 3 years prior was a little more stable in his position that you were?