CathInfo.com

Even does not stand. In order for it to be at least permissible to break one's vows or fail in one's duties of obedience to one's legitimate superiors in the spirit of a Fraternity of Bishops and Priests, there must be at least an undeniable danger to the Faith that is openly advocated for. But, no such danger exists, because it is not only not wrong, but even positively good, to obtain Ordinary Jurisdiction from the Pope, with no strings attached at all, as has already been granted to the Society, even in advance of the anticipated resumption of doctrinal discussions in the distant future. Also, it is more dangerous to be under no kind of habitual jurisdiction at all, as those faithful who want to break away from the SSPX now are doing, than to be subject to the SSPX Shepherds who have not professed any heresies at all.

Hi Xavier, your questions and arguments assume nothing has changed within the SSPX that is why you say "speculation" "predictions" etc. You are arguing based on the assumption  nothing has happened. But those on the Resistance side, know by fact and experience that the SSPX has changed, they are reacting to what HAS happened and not what they think will happen in the near or distant future. So any debates with you or Mr. McFarland, etc. will go nowhere until you accept there has been changes in the SSPX, then once you accept that, then you can begin to debate on what is the proper reaction to those changes.