Even if SVs and R&R disagree on WHO among the trad clergy is VALID, by the force of the logic that you so highly value...

you MUST admit that NONE of the groups have clergy trained in ANY institutes that could confer the degrees, which would make them to be considered experts in any field of Catholic learning.

When I was at SSPX seminary, we had an elderly priest visit who complaint about the same thing, that these modern Traditional clergy fancy themselves theologians, but the amount of training they received was before Vatican II considered just sufficient to be appointed an assistant pastor somewhere, and then after some years of experience and showing your worth, you might be appointed pastor.  He said that in order to be taken serious as an expert in anything, whether theology or philosophy or Canon Law, you had to go to Rome and receive advanced degrees.  It regularly happened at SSPX that a newly-ordained priest was immediately assigned to be a seminary professor, even in dogmatic theology ... no advanced degree, and not even typically having to work your way up by, say, teaching philosophy first.

Now, to some extent that's understandable, since there aren't exactly reliable advanced institutions like that around anymore.  Even if they hadn't been infested with Modernism, they're also just garbage by now, not worth the paper they're written on.  But then they have to just admit that and not overstate their case, like referring to certain Trad priests as "theologian" or "Canon lawyer".

I meant "living".

But, yes he was a seemingly brilliant and holy man.

Though I do NOT hold the Cassiciacuм Thesis.

Whathever seminary the attended, it has been infested with Modernist after Vatican II, even if it was orthodox when he studied there.

And yes, he was the most qualified Traditionalist clergy ever, and no one will ever surpass him, since the official institutions are now worthless. 

When I was at SSPX seminary, we had an elderly priest visit who complaint about the same thing, that these modern Traditional clergy fancy themselves theologians, but the amount of training they received was before Vatican II considered just sufficient to be appointed an assistant pastor somewhere, and then after some years of experience and showing your worth, you might be appointed pastor.  He said that in order to be taken serious as an expert in anything, whether theology or philosophy or Canon Law, you had to go to Rome and receive advanced degrees.  It regularly happened at SSPX that a newly-ordained priest was immediately assigned to be a seminary professor, even in dogmatic theology ... no advanced degree, and not even typically having to work your way up by, say, teaching philosophy first.

Now, to some extent that's understandable, since there aren't exactly reliable advanced institutions like that around anymore.  Even if they hadn't been infested with Modernism, they're also just garbage by now, not worth the paper they're written on.  But then they have to just admit that and not overstate their case, like referring to certain Trad priests as "theologian" or "Canon lawyer".

I recall reading St. Robert Bellarmine taught, and admitted he was just pages ahead of his students.