It's ironic that Vatican II gutted #2 by instituting collegiality of bishops. The current Pope is a prisoner in a democratic/ administrative system imposed on him by VCII.
References, please! Show me how "friendliness" of bishops makes the Pope a prisoner. Please, you cannot show me how Vatican II did such a thing because it didn't, it only restated the fact that the Pope is a bishop like all the rest (it didn't deny that the Bishop of Rome is St. Peter's Successor with Universal Jurisdiction in the Church and Infallibility), it was talking about the nature of Orders not the nature of Authority or Jurisdiction nor of Petrine Office.
Of course the SSPX agrees with VCI. Their point is that no Church authority, even the Pope, or a Council, can teach a new dogma or contradict Tradition. In the sense that a Pope acts to uphold the deposit of faith, he is of course to be obeyed.
So they should follow with the right conclusion, that Vatican II taught no new dogma nor
contradicted past teaching at all.
In the case where he or a Council should use the authentic magisterium to impose a non-infallible personal opinion or orientation upon the faithful that has no basis in Tradition, this decision must be resisted.
This is a false conclusion: if a pope or council can't contradict the faith in their official teaching then it ought to be assumed first that they did not in fact contradict it.
This also comes from a false premise that popes and councils are not infallible by the ordinary magisterium in the first place. But they are, so (as St. Augustine taught) the error ought first be thought in our own reasoning, that is, our false interpretation of what the council actually meant. Do you not yet understand that the authentic magisterium is always infallible and never a personal opinion? Or is the Pope not infallible when teaching
on matters of faith and morals? Is the magisterium
not the teaching of authority
of the Church?
For instance, Popes and Bishops from the New Mass institution of 1969 through the recent Motu Proprio denied priests the right to say the Tridentine Mass. This decision was contrary to Tradition including a previous Papal Bull, yet it was exercised by the Authentic (but non-infallible) magisterium. JPII in Ecclesia Dei, stated that priests needed the permission of their bishop to say TLM. It was an exercise of the authentic but non-infallible magisterium that was wrong and in conflict with Tradition.
First John Paul II said that it was the right of every Catholic to attend Mass according to the Tridentine Missal ("rightful aspirations"
). Second, every priest does need the permission of their bishop to say Mass, any Mass, for priests can only say Mass licitly with the faculties to do so. A priest cannot just enter another diocese and offer Mass, they need the faculties and permission (Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction) to do so from the Ordinary (bishop) of that diocese.
The priests who resisted this decision were persecuted, suspended, and sent to re-education camps. The rest of the priests went along in a false sense of obedience and did not say the Mass of all Time.
The crimes and sins against those priests are horrible but nonetheless it was not the official teaching of the Church but the personal sins of bishops and other priests and such, even of disobedience to the pope.
In the end the SSPX and Traditional Priests who continued to say TLM without permission were vindicated by Benedict XVI.
When was this? You're to have to show me that document. There's a priest I know who needs to see that right away. The fact is Pope Benedict XVI has done no such thing nor could he because he'd deny the very nature of the Church's hierarchical structure of jurisdiction. Priests cannot say Mass without the faculties to do so, it's that simple. H.H. was also very clear that the problem with the SSPX is something much deeper (ie. they see heresy and error where there is none and following that belief that they deny the authority of the Church-at least concerning the council). Please read his letter to the bishops that accompanied SP.
I predict in the future the current priests of the SSPX and Abp. Lefebvre will be vindicated. A Pope cannot excommunicate Tradition or declare it schismatic.
I hope so but I don't think so if they continue to refuse to accept that Vatican II is not the problem but that it is only persons in positions of authority in the church. The Archbishop was even willing to accept that since he clearly said that he would accept the council in the light of Tradition.
...the Abp. will be found....to have been justified in time.
Absolutely! But not for the reason you think. Not because Vatican II has error (because it doesn't) but because the Church really was and is in a crisis caused by Modernism and Liberalism.