All good responses.
Where I'm at the SSPX chapel is closer than the FSSP parish, but the SSPX priest is a little less hardline. Isn't that odd? He sticks to the Gospel for sermons and he will discuss the crisis of SSPX and Rome if you bring it up privately, but it's never in the sermon.
The FSSP pastor hammers on the Pope just about every Sunday. He's very black and white about doctrine. He told me he despises ambiguity and he has to keep the flock from succuмbing to modernist creep. So now we go there most of the time.
I did notice more modernism at the FSSP parish in San Diego, but not in the clergy, and not at their other locations that I've visited. It dawned on me a short time ago that if I was blindfolded and brought to an FSSP Mass or devotion and told it was SSPX, I wouldn't know the difference.
I expected a lot of defense of Rome stuff from them, but they are not into papalotry, just the opposite. So I admit that I had several preconceived notions about them and was disabused of it pretty quickly.
Someone brought up going from SSPX to FSSP. They say one must make a general confession due to doubtful authority of independent traditional priests and if married by SSPX it's "healed at the root" (I forget the latin) and blessed, something like that. Which goes to jurisdiction which seems to be a matter of interpretation after a year of really intense research. Cathinfo helped a lot and pointed me to other sources in my investigations, so thanks for that.
Is it correct that epikeia does not seem to apply any longer for the SSPX since they seek regularization from Rome? And now all the others just seem schismatic in one way or another. Epikeia used to be my justification.
One thing for sure, it should not be this complicated for a baptized Catholic to know the right thing to do and save his soul. One false move and down the elevator shaft! :heretic: