You did not answer my question. I repeat: How can you say that Bp. Williamson and Co. are not excommunicated? Are you going to contend that the excommunications are not valid?
Yes I am contending the excommunications were invalid. Not merely unjust but intrinsically invalid.
There is evidence, I repeat EVIDENCE, that the excommunications are valid. The paper exists. How can you deny the existence of a solid?
As I said in my first answer, "implied schism" was the word invention used by whoever actually wrote the Late Pontiff's motu proprio. There are more logical fallacies and false assumptions in that paper than should ever be in a document with a Pope's name on it. Excommunications are not infallible and they can be unjust and they can be invalid. Unjust excommunications should still be heeded and dealt with but an invalid excommunication should be ignored.