Asking that +ABL's "excommunication" be lifted is acknowledging its validity. The SSPX had always wanted it to be declared null and void from its inception.
Yes, the common 'take' of everyone in the line of ABL (which is the true
Church) was that the so-called excoms must be anulled, that is, to
acknowledge that they never existed in the first place. But modernist Rome
would no more do that than they would acknowledge that Vat.II was run by
an unclean spirit. And as such, JPII's action of announcing the excoms was,
for a Pope, the kind of thing that could put him in hell forever. He obviously
didn't repent before he died, because he did not annul them! Well, that is,
at least as far as we know, he didn't. I guess it's possible that he repented
at the last moment, but his underlings, the Freemasons and Zionists who
stood guard over his failing body, would not have let that come to light.
Therefore, the unjust and invalid excoms are of no concern to the true
Church. And it is improper for laymen to demand that a true bishop take
any action on it, because the bishop is in a much better place to judge what
the right thing to do is. So I'm with Matthew on this one.
The interesting thing is, +Fellay went mute on this 'take' right about the
same time that he started to go silent on the negotiations and their
progress. It seems to me that must have been the time that he caved to
Rome's demand that he has to back off from the hard line if he wants to
have 'peace' with them. That was also the time when he stopped sending
out letters "To Friends and Benefactors."
And then, as Fr. Pfeiffer explains, the "mask came off" in May of 2012. He
says this in
, in answer to a question from a lady,
asking him why he took so long to come out publicly with his Resistance
stand.
It's interesting, that at the time, his concern was whether he was taking
action too early. But he explains elsewhere that he did what he recognized
he had to do.