I received an email which convinced me that my objections to this article were ill-founded, and consequently, I am retracting my opinion on the matter.
Below is my modified (to protect anonymity) response to my correspondent.
Thank you for your email.
There is no doubt that I have become disillusioned by the morphing of the SSPX as it prepares for entrance into the conciliar church.
But I do not think that had anything to do with my comments on this particular article.
In truth, my post on CI suffered from haste (in both reading the article, and commenting upon it), as I was trying to beat the midnight deadline (i.e., I have given up internet, excepting emails, for Lent).
That was poor judgment, to be sure, but a true explanation nonetheless.
In any case, someone posted a rebuttal...which substantially reiterates your arguments above, and while I was rereading and reflecting, your email came through.
In truth, I did (and do) think the citations you provide from the article are a rather cursory defense of the traditional practice, but I suppose that is a more stylistic, than substantive, objection.
Somewhat more pertinent, I wonder why the SSPX would bother to recount the new legislation to traditionalists at all?
In any case, as I have nearly an hour left, I will go back to Cathinfo and retract that thread.
Thank you for the correction, and my apologies.
Wishing you a great Lent.