CathInfo.com

So, Xavier, you spammed in an article once that the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants is dogmatic fact.

That would make your hero Archbishop Lefebvre a heretic.

So, Xavier, you spammed in an article once that the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants is dogmatic fact.

That would make your hero Archbishop Lefebvre a heretic.

To be fair, only materially, and you think he was a material heretic on EENS so how is that different? 

That was, +ABL says, both a valid Sacrament and Sacrifices; but the graces would be less. I'm not obliged to explain anymore to someone as boorish and polemical as yourself, but read this and you will see the true opinion: "Archbishop Lefebvre also said: “I never denied that these Masses said faithfully according to the Novus Ordo were valid; nor did I ever say that they were heretical or blasphemous.”2 Careful, therefore! Let us be firm, but let us not be simplistic." http://www.angelusonline.org/index.php?section=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=3501 The true opinion is that an NOM would have like 1/100th of the TLM's graces. Archbishop Lefebvre also said, "Make every effort to have the Mass of St. Pius V, but if it is impossible to find one within forty kilometers and if there is a pious priest who says the New Mass in as traditional a way as possible, it is good for you to assist at it to fulfill your Sunday obligation." https://sspx.org/en/what-archbishop-lefebvre-said-about-new-mass

You're being disingenuous. How? Consider the following:

"The Church which affirms such errors is both schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is therefore not Catholic." - +Lefebvre, 1976 reflections on suspension.

"To whatever extent pope, bishops, priests or faithful adhere to this new Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church." - +Lefebvre, 1976 reflections on suspension.

"To whatever extent the pope departed from . . . tradition he would become schismatic, he would breach with the Church. Theologians such as Saint Bellarmine, Cajetan, Cardinal Journet and many others have studied this possibility. So it is not something inconceivable." - +Lefebvre, Le Figaro, August 4, 1976.

"If it happened that the pope was no longer the servant of the truth, he would no longer be pope." - +Lefebvre, Lille, August 29, 1976.

"I would not say that the pope is not the pope. But neither would I say that you cannot say the pope is not the pope." - +Lefebvre, Long Island, 1979.

"It is possible we may be obliged to believe this pope is not the pope. For twenty years Monsignor de Castro Mayer and I preferred to wait..." - +Lefebvre, March 30 1986.

"You know, for some time, many people, the sedevacantists, have been saying, 'there is no more pope.' But I think that for me it was not yet the time to say that, because it was not sure, it was not evident..."

The above quotes, as well as a wealth of others I have not included here, indicate that sedevacantism was at least within the realm of theological possibilities for the Archbishop. You have to remember that the Archbishop had a long career and dealt for years with the Conciliar authorities. Most of the quotes from the Archbishop which seem to indicate his support for attendance at the New Mass are from the years immediately following its implementation, before he had seen firsthand its monstrous effects. The Archbishop also signed several of the Vatican 2 docuмents. Does this mean that the Archbishop approved of the council?

One of the Society's foremost theologians, Bishop +Tissier, has expressed a belief on numerous occasions that the new rite of episcopal consecration is doubtfully valid, as have a large number of competent priests and sacramental theologians, both within the Society and outside.
 
If you're really trying to tow the line of the Archbishop you should try to approach the subject with more nuance and consider the context from which those quotes came.