I always had a distaste for Vatican II changes even though I was a child back then. I guess my Catholic father not liking the changes may have influenced me, but I - on my own - disliked the Kumbaya stuff and how we never really learned much of anything important in catechism classes.

Anyhow, then when I was much older... after having been outside the Church for a long time, doing stupid and sinful things.. I one day prayed the rosary and it changed my whole life. In time I began going to daily Mass, which I didn't even know existed until someone invited me! My family had been Sunday Catholics only.. 

That was an awesome thing.. hearing God's Word daily. I was very enthused. But then I saw all these really bad, un-Catholic things going on in the Church.. a priest who ad-libbed during Mass, changing the words to the liturgy, and sometimes the words were gibberish in any case.. and I could go on and on.

Then I found out about Lefebvre and began to understand why I disliked V2 so much... It was worse than I thought! And i hated the changes ten times more.

I'm skipping through a lot of interesting twists and turns in my life.. but anyhow, today I lean toward a certain version of Sedevacantism, though I disagree w/ some of their leaders  on this and that issue.

So anyway, I'm wondering how many people here have had a similar journey?

Wow, your family was a little more into Jesus than mine... (not a high bar there).

It's no wonder I was lost (separated from the Lord/sinful) for years and years when I was young... In other words, I wasn't quite raised properly. My parents did a lot of good things for their big family but they missed the boat on the most important thing: getting us to Heaven and the only way you can do that is to be  in the Catholic Church, which BTW, the true Church always taught this: no salvation o/side the Church. 

The NO church (so called) does not teach anything remotely like that. They, as you may know, teach that all religions lead to God. Well, all religions are capable of giving you... shall we say: bits and pieces of information about God, but that's about it. They cannot lead one to Heaven as only Jesus and His Church does. For one thing, only the CC has the Real Presence of Christ. You can read books on Jesus, but as they say "There's nothing like BEING THERE" (being WITH someone you love).

What were the main issues your family had w/ the NO church... Was there one thing that really got to them the most?

I don't have anything good to say about the NO church, and I think that it was by design that there was not any one thing about it.....I mainly remember only fragments from 60 years ago, but I remember the fag priests that invaded the Church in order  to replace the old priests. But for my parents, it was the new "mass" that sounded the initial warning bell, the seminaries emptying out, priests and nuns leaving their vocations, many to get married - often to each other. I could ramble on about the repercussions of the revolution within the Church, but mainly was the new "mass" that did it for them. Like many, they knew it was wrong, but there was much confusion and chaos going on within and without the Church back then, it's as if everything payed a part to get the faithful to just say "the hell with it all" and get them to either go along with the NO, or leave the Church completely, and many did just that.

So you were outside of the Catholic Church or did you go to some other "branch" of it, like the SSPX? I didn't know anything about them until a few years ago and then only because I drove by a building that had a sign up saying: Traditional Mass. They had books on Lefebvre which were a big eye opener for me. I had always dislike V2 but didn't know much about it. I tell people about how the Church was infiltrated, but you know how it goes: all those who have something to lose by facing this indesputable fact will do whatever they have to, including egregious persecution, to try to shut you up. This one forum I used to go on started picking at me, not allowing me to post new threads. I'm surprised they didn't ban me. But I don't want to be there anyway because all I go  through is a bunch of arguments from Protestants and NO "catholics" arguing w/ me or disrespecting me because... the latter group (NO "catholics") don't want to face the truth of what happened to the Vatican. I fear for their souls because Jesus said that those who do not proclaim Him before men (His Church included, I'm sure) will be denied by the Father. 
So yeh, I was wondering where your family went, exactly, when all those distasteful changes began to happen. 

There is kind of a long story about those days, so to keep it from TLDR, I'll just say I was only a child but I can tell you that by 1968 or so, which is by the time I was 8 years old, I learned my altar boy Latin responses and my brothers and I were serving the True Mass in people's  basements, living rooms and garages in the pre-SSPX days. Then within 3 or 4 years I think,  that grew into Masses being celebrated in banquet halls and school gymnasiums as more and more faithful found out that there was a priest here or there saying the true Mass.

See the attachment, although we weren't in any of the pictures, my family and I could have been in most of those pictures, I remember most of those people shown and served Mass for almost all of those priests - and many more non-SSPX priests who got expelled from their rectories for refusing to go along with the new mass and religion.
     

Thanks for the pictures.. made me nostalgic for the old days... :) 
What is TLDR? 
So are you still SSPX? And if so, did you ever consider being a sedevacantist? 

Sedeism is not an option with me, never has been because there has never been any reason to even go there, but mainly because of the dogma that states: "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

For me, there's no reason to risk my salvation, and in my experience with the idea, the main thing sedeism is good for you've already described with the title of this thread.
 

Sigh ... going to a chapel where Prevost's picture is hanging in the vestibule does not qualify as being "subject to the Roman Pontiff".  Said "Roman Pontiff" told you to get your ass back to the Novus Ordo and that you cannot denounce the NOM and Vatican II.  But you blow all that off and claim subjection because you pay lip service.

Doesn't get any more pathetic.  

That's to say nothing of how it begs the question that he's the Pope, since being "subject to" an Anti-Pope also does not qualify as subjection to the Roman Pontiff.

Catholics go by the teaching of St. Peter and the Apostles (see my sig), and I like to reference the example of St. Thomas More: "I am the pope's good subject, but God's first."  It's not the least bit complicated to Catholics.

Actually, you're right ... it's not that complicated.  You could even start by looking up the word "subject" in your pocket English dictionary.

Well you can be the guy who tells us R&R when we can obey him without offending God. Until then, I will remain the pope's good subject, but God's first. Very simple.

When I was a kid in this mess, a lot of the older priests who were clinging to the true faith and Mass that we came across used to say something as if it was a well known axiom or proverb or something among priests. It seemed normal for it to come up whenever they were discussing the crisis with my parents or other trads, they used to say: "He who eats the pope dies," or variations of it. I know Fr. Ward knew of it, heck, I think even the then Fr. Sanborn knew of it. 

Anyone else ever heard of it?