Lynne Cheney just before the dawn of the regime of the Arkansas Antichrist and Mrs. Antichrist, warned us of what we had to look forward to in Clintons' America and she was right. She rooted that argument in the intellectual dishonesty which is the hallmark of the "I, Pierre Rivard" school of politics. It explains the extreme partisanship that has characterized our civil society ever since.
The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, admittedly not one of ours, was capable of sharp insight nonetheless. FDorget his obvious sins of supporting abortion and other Demonratic fare. Concentrate instead on his assertion that each person is entitled to his or her own opinion but no one is entitled to his or her own set of facts.
The dishonesty that has long characterized the social issues civil war in our society now infects inter-church squabbling between the SSPX schism and the actual Roman Catholic Church. SSPX is defined by what amounts to: We dissent. Therefore we are.
Jesus Christ made promises to the Roman Catholic Church at the outset, not only establishing Peter as pope but giving to Peter (and his successors the keys of the kingdom to bind and to loose in heaven as on earth) and Jesus Christ promised to be with His Church (one and the same including JP II and Benedict XVI and ultimately NOT including the Econe 5 and their adherents). If you do not believe in the promises of Jesus Christ Himself, why would you imagine yourself a practicing and believing Roman Catholic or in any way "traditional?" If Jesus Christ is not believable, then just what or who is????? Certainly not one rebellious French archbishop willing to massacre his priestly vow of obedience in order to serve his own offended tastes and imagined grievances!
SSPX is based upon the lies, sins and effronteries of Marcel and his co-conspirators in ecclesiastical crime and their adherents. SSPX advances what is not an "alternative reality" but that which is not, in any sense, reality. That is why SSPX would have real problems with Telling the Truth, which BTW has American History as collateral damage incurred because of the tactics of an academic left run wild with multiplicities of alleged "realities" a la "I, Pierre Rivard." Truth itself is the main victim.
"I mention this strange opposition between the Passover and sacrifice, because it represents the architectonic principle of a book recently published by the Society of St. Pius X, claiming that a dogmatic rupture exists between the new liturgy of Paul VI and the preceding catholic liturgical tradition. This rupture is seen precisely in the fact that everything is interpreted henceforth on the basis of the "paschal mystery," instead of the redeeming sacrifice of expiation of Christ; the category of the paschal mystery is said to be the heart of the liturgical reform, and it is precisely that which appears to be the proof of the rupture with the classical doctrine of the Church. It is clear that there are authors who lay themselves open to such a misunderstanding; but that it is a misunderstanding is completely evident for those who look more closely."
We are both well aware of Christ's promise and to that I only say amen. As to who is right and wrong, it is a lot more complex than Pope said this ergo, everyone else is wrong. Both sides in this debate can selectively quote from their own personal favorite dead Pope up to and including John Paul II. The idividuals mentioned in Ecclesia Dei are excommunicated. The Pope used his authority here because of the illicit ordination of bishops. As far as I know, no other reason pertaining to the beliefs and practices of the SSPX has been used to justify the excommunication. Indeed, I can think of no other. The SSPX ought to seek regularization of these bishops before it seeks anything else. I would love to see that. Until then, I tolerate the Novus Ordo which is easy enough as long as the parish folkies aren't doing the liturgical music which happens every other month or so.