To note that +Lefebvre referred to the New Mass as "a b*stard " mass. That means illegitimate -clearly.. . Fr. G. (Resistance) in Canada believes the N.O. Missae was legitimately promulgated. So there is no absolute consensus even in our movement of Resistance.
In the NeoSSPX, Fr. Pagliarani doesn't use those words in his latest Declaration of Faith: he states that the Holy Sacrifice cannot just be a commemoration, a sacred assembly, a spiritual meal etc..Evil things need to be fought against and eventually condemned. Are they really "Semper idem?" Where is the veritable legacy of +Lefebvre? More or less the same problem with some of the other sacraments...they now accept N.O. confirmation, ordinations and consecration (i.e. Bishop V. Huonder). Seems like the neoSSPX has painted itself in a corner: if N.O. bishops are valid and legit, logically they can make use of those; so there is no State of necessity on that front. Their house of cards is imploding. Enemies need to be αttαcκεd, there needs to be a clear "Line in the sand", so to speak.
If not, then we live in ambiguous times. Vat II could be corrected in the future, as per Fr Schmidberger in his conclusion of the booklet :Time Bombs of Vat.II...Pope Leo XIV needs prayers to see the Light.
In 1988, seminarian Daniel Le Roux wrote his famous book "Peter lovest Thou Me?". It was printed and available immediately before the consecrations. The idea was to take advantage of the moment to criticize the N.O. church. Econe had the attention of the Catholic world... a golden opportunity.
I hope your paper hits the internet very soon, great opportunity to explain the internal problems of the neoSSPX, and why the "Resistance" came to be.
Long talk here by Fr. Ed MacDonald (Resistance) when he visited Canada.
___________
He also wrote an article stating that the SSPX no longer exists, because , following St Thomas Aquinas philosophy, its essence is no longer.
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-sermons/fr-macdonald-article-on-sspx-anniversary/Pray.