Lefebvre's story is much simpler: DISOBEDIENCE. He ought to be toast.
But, in the end, he will die and his followers will fade away and Lefebvre's name and life will be a paragraph, then a sentence in the Church history books. Bump in the road, nothing more.
When he consecrated four bishops instead of one in 1988, as Rome had permitted, he stepped into disobedience. There is simply no way to excuse or explain away that schismatic act. On the other hand, the Vatican has clearly stated for several years now that the SSPX is not in a state of schism but in an irregular juridical status.
History will eventually show his primary arguments were correct and will be very sympathetic to his cause. The Traditional Latin Mass was never abrogated, as Pope Benedict XVI has subsequently admitted, and most of the novelties and liturgical innovations since VII are not defensible in, or even imagined by, the actual documents of VII.
Pope Benedict XVI is actually giving credibility to their assertions by insisting the only proper interpretation of VII is in light of the 1960 years of Catholic Tradition which proceeded it. And I say these things as a Catholic loyal to the Magisterium who attends the Traditional Latin Mass under the provisions of Pope Benedict XVI's Summorum Pontifuicum and a frequent critic of the excesses of certain elements within the SSPX.
But, in the end, he will die and his followers will fade away and Lefebvre’s name and life will be a paragraph, then a sentence in the Church history books...
...oops...hate to tell you this, but Lefebvre died in 1991, and his ‘followers’ continue to enjoy Pope Benedict’s Motu inspired worship at an increasing rate...your astounding ignorance regarding Lefebvre kind of invalidates anything you have to say about him, don’t ya think...