Dominick, while your point is a good one you're completely missing the larger one here. I'm beginning to think that I may have mistaken naivety for maliciousness when I first met you.
Most in the Society won't deny the validity of the NO-mass, only it's potential for harm, but forget about that for a minute because it's really not the point here.
Don't you find it simply outrageous that the only Catholics suffering official sanctions anymore are traditionalists for relatively minor offenses while flagrantly evil heretics and deviant criminals are giving aid and comfort?
This is nothing less than wickedness and sickness. No matter one's feelings on the SSPX or NO-mass, any Christian with a conscience must absorb this glaring truth.
What you in your post above are correctly calling for is for all of us to be the church militant, yet if we are to fight evil we must be able to correctly identify it. Whether you know it or not the imperfect SSPX is very much an ally in this battle, not an opponent.
This is what bothers me. Yes, I do think that SSPX is, at minimum, in an irregular relationship to the Holy See. I do not attend their Masses, although I recognize their validity (but not licitness). I attend the Missa Normativa most of the time, and the indult Mass occasionally.
But, as far as priorities go, the kind of disobedience we're talking about should be way down on the list, compared to so many outrageous things that are allowed to go on.
I'd like to know if this bishop is enforcing other rules with equal zeal. For instance, is he denying Holy Communion to publicly pro-abortion politicians and voters? Is he suspending priests that promote the idea of ordaining women? Is he ordering parishes to forgo the habitual use of EMHCs? Is he clearing active homosexuals, heretics and apostates out of the chancery offices?
It does seem that many, if not most, bishops see disobedient traditionalists as the greatest threat, for some reason that I cannot understand, or at least agree with.