Neither is Roberto dei Mattei nor Maike Hickson willing to affirm the old ecclesiology of the Church with Feeneyite EENS and with such a big doctrinal and theological divide among us they are talking about the pope being in heresy.

MH: You seem to suggest that the Pope may be promoting schism and heresy in the Church. What would be the consequences of this most grave situation? Would not the Pope lose his authority as Pope? 

RDM: One cannot sum up such an important and complex problem in a few words. On this point it is necessary to have a theological debate, on which topic one may refer to the volume True or False Pope by Robert J. Sisco and John Salza, to the writings of Abbott Jean-Michel Gleize in [the French journal] Courrier de Rome and above all to the study of Arnaldo Xavier da Silveira, Ipotesi teologica di un Papa eretico [Theological hypotheses about a heretic Pope], the Italian edition of which I edited in 2016 and also the next edition in English. The author, whose basic position I share, develops the thesis of the medieval decretists, of St. Robert Bellarmine, and of modern theologians like Pietro Ballerini, according to whom, while there is a basic incompatibility between [holding] heresy and [holding] papal authority, the Pope does not lose his office until his heresy becomes apparent to the entire Church. 

https://abyssum.org/2017/12/11/professor-roberto-de-mattei-offers-us-clarifications-and-good-advice-as-we-mover-closer-to-a-formal-crisis-in-the-church/

Even if Pope Francis is in heresy so is Pope Benedict and Prof. Robero dei Mattei since they reject Vatican Council II( Feeneyite-without the premise)and they interpret Vatican Council II, with an irrational premise.They reject the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(Feeneyite) by assuming invisible cases of the baptism of desire and baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are visible exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members.

So this is public heresy which Prof. Mattei has not denied all these years.

I choose to interpret Vatican Council II without the irrational premise while he does not.

I say that I am a Feeneyìte on EENS while in my brief meeting with him, he said that he is not.

For me the Nicene Creed would mean that I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and not three known baptisms, while for him it would be I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins. If there were no three or more known baptisms for him then how could the baptism of desire etc be exceptions to EENS?

For me LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 ,GS 22 refer to hypothetical cases for Prof. Mattei and the SSPX bishops and superiors they would be non hypothetical cases. So in this way they become exceptions to EENS and Tradition( old ecclesiology, Syllabus of Errors etc).So Vatican Council II emerges as a rupture with Tradition for all of them when the fault is there really with their inference.

Neither is Roberto dei Mattei not Maike Hickson willing to affirm the old ecclesiology of the Church with Feeneyite EENS and with such a big doctrinal and theological divide among us they are talking about the pope being in heresy.

Of course he is in heresy but then so are they!
-Lionel Andrades