CathInfo.com

So let me distill your first substantive point from the ad hominem bluster.

So your assertion is that dogmatic facts are not infallible.

That's absurd.  They are called dogmatic facts precisely because they are DOGMATIC, certain with the certainty of faith.  These are called "facts" to distinguish them from propositions that are of a theological nature, whereas dogmatic facts are of a historical nature.  So you wrote an entire article on dogmatic facts while having no earthly idea about what a dogmatic fact actually is.

I'll dig up the quotes for you from a Cardinal writing about dogmatic facts during the reign of Pope Pius XII who clearly states that if someone denied the legitimacy of Pope Pius XII, he would be a heretic.

The "una cuм" debate is simply, uncharitable legalism, like the Pharisees of Christ's time would invent to divide the people and keep power over them.  In particular, Fr Cekada's article on the subject (God rest his soul) is historically, liturgically and logically wrong.  The whole idea is a Sede power play to keep the laity in the pews.  
.
The prayer itself mentions "and all orthodox believers".  So...if the pope/bishop you are praying for aren't orthodox, then even if you mention them, the prayer doesn't apply to them specifically, but only to their office.  It's so simple there doesn't even need to be a discussion.