Okay, now I am really boggled. Why would participation in a Mass said by an excommunicated Priest not be sinful? What is the point of this excommunication if not to red alert the laity? And why would the collection be justified? This is as clear as mud.
DC, join the club. These letters are classic doublespeak, complete oxymorons in and of themselves. They are not designed to clear up any issues but are simply weak attempts to control a movement which is rapidly taking on a life of its own. If the hierarchy had its way, there would be no Traditional Mass. This is a movement driven by the Holy Spirit working through the laity. If not for that 'pesky' Archbishop LeFebvre, Catholics today would have no memory of our Mass of Ages. There would be no SSPX or FSSP. The Archbishop's excommunication was bogus and everyone knows it. He was 'excommunicated' for being too Catholic. He refused to submit to modernism and was 'punished'. Fortunately, just a few of the hierarchy remember something taught about eternal damnation and blasphemy so they stop short of declaring the Traditional Mass invalid. They aren't feeling too lucky these days. Restoration is at hand.
The question is rapidly becoming not "did Archbishop LeFebvre schism?" but "WHO schismed back the 1960s?" Schism by its nature implies a deviation from Catholic teaching and tradition. The Archbishop elected to stay with the status quo, the Novus Ordos elected to go their own way. Now just exactly WHO schismed?