http://www.onepeterfive.com/ep-39-snowbank/

This is a link to a OnePeterFive interview of Dr. Michael Sirilla by Steve Skojec.  Dr. Sirilla is a professor of theology at Franciscan University of Steubenville and one of the signers of the theological evaluation of Amoris Laetitia submitted to Rome from which, most likely, the Dubia of the four cardinals was taken.  At 43:15 in this interview Steve Skojec asks a question that presupposes that the pope is the rule of faith. He assumes that the attribute of indefectibility of the Church means that the pope cannot ever error on faith and morals in the exercise of his ordinary (authentic) magisterium.

Dr. Sirilla replies, "That's wrong." Dr. Sirilla does not directly affirm that dogma is the rule of faith but he makes it clear that Skojec's understanding of the magisterium is decidedly wrong while giving a brief, but incomplete, description of what the Magisterium grounded upon the Church's attribute of infallibility exactly is.  

Now, Steve Skojec is a bright and articulate guy. He graduated from Steubenville with a degree in theology and communications. Yet, as a conservative Catholic, just like nearly every sedevacantist, he has held the error that the pope is the rule of faith. It has only been the utter vulgarity of Pope Francis that has moved many conservative Catholics to finally open their minds and show a willingness to be corrected on this critical question. Unfortunately, most sedevacantists are not as docile as the conservative Skojec.  

The SSPX and priests formed under their tutelage have the same problem of holding the pope as the rule of faith. They believe that dogma can develop and be interpreted in a non-literal sense. That is why they believe that any "good willed" Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, animist, etc., etc., can be a secret member of the Church and obtain salvation as a "good willed" Protestant, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, animist, etc., etc. It also explains why +Fellay could not defend the faith in the doctrinal discussions because he rejects dogma as its rule. He could offer nothing stronger than a sincere opinion in his defense. Unfortunately, most of the resistance is in the same sinking ship. What will happen is that most of those SSPX supporters who do not follow +Fellay to Rome will become sedevacantists. It is bizarre that they appeal to the indefectibility of the Church to remove the Pope and then enter a church that is permanently and manifestly defective. And yet few ever think about retracing their steps.  

There are many who have defended Dogma as Dogma with the SSPX faithful for years and have made little headway because their leadership is unable to grasp this essential distinction. This interview is a hopeful sign that there may be many conservative Catholics who are now opening up to tradition that cannot exist unless it is grounded in the fundamental truth that dogma is the rule of faith, and not the pope. We might be seeing the development of a true traditional movement that can actually defend our faith and our immemorial ecclesiastical traditions.

Drew