Archbishop Lefebvre had permission to consecrate one bishop and instead he consecrated four.  So, after years of trying to have an 'experiment with Tradition', Pope Saint John Paul II the Great instead excommunicated +Lefebvre and his four bishops.  Almost instantaneously, he then introduced/allowed the formation of the FSSP from among the former SSPX clergy who thought +Lefebvre had gone too far. 

The reason for its existence is/was to pull adherents away from the SSPX (like establishing parishes everywhere the SSPX is set up) and the archbishop said to stay away from them (I don't have that quote handy but maybe someone here could help out).  Though there are many pious laymen and well-intentioned priests in the FSSP, the organization itself wasn't/isn't about Doctrine but about the Latin Mass and was off track from the beginning.

My vote is No.

I didn't know we had that many here.

How many priests in the "indult" groups are even ordained in the Old Rite by bishops consecrated in the Old Rite?

They accept the counter Church and its teachings as legitimate, placing them outside the realm of Catholic tradition, orthodoxy, in the Novus Ordo modernist heterodoxy. So how exactly are they adhering to traditional Catholicism by adhering to the New Church?

Correct me if I am wrong but aren’t Council Docuмents really meant for the consumption of the bishops and priests of the Church more so than the laity? I feel like many Catholics are legitimately not knowledgeable about the heresies in Vatican II docuмents and therefore have made no investigation into why this is so, nor the implications.  People are busy raising their families and many may not do a great deal of reading; it doesn’t mean they are lazy, malicious or stupid, but not being a towering intellect is not a sin.  Maybe some of these people weren’t pleased with the abuses and errors and heresy that they saw in their New Order church, and somehow, not sure how these Indult Masses are generally found, but they found it and they didn’t see these abuses and errors so they just go to Mass there now.  Simple as that.  When I was in the New Order, I saw many abuses and errors and I often left church going, -Man, I’m pretty sure that was heresy or sacrilege,- but I legitimately believed that my priests were just bad priests.  It never even occurred to me that it was anything more than that until Jorge burst on the scene.  I just don’t see how a Catholic who believes what the Church has always taught is not in the traditional Catholic movement but as I’ve said before, I don’t care about the traditional Catholic movement; they’d be Catholic even if they are deprived of the Sacraments through the malice of evil men.  What is this “movement” supposed to mean anyway?  Movement to do what? 

Archbishop Lefebvre had permission to consecrate one bishop and instead he consecrated four.  So, after years of trying to have an 'experiment with Tradition', Pope Saint John Paul II the Great instead excommunicated +Lefebvre and his four bishops.  Almost instantaneously, he then introduced/allowed the formation of the FSSP from among the former SSPX clergy who thought +Lefebvre had gone too far. 

The reason for its existence is/was to pull adherents away from the SSPX (like establishing parishes everywhere the SSPX is set up) and the archbishop said to stay away from them (I don't have that quote handy but maybe someone here could help out).  Though there are many pious laymen and well-intentioned priests in the FSSP, the organization itself wasn't/isn't about Doctrine but about the Latin Mass and was off track from the beginning.

My vote is No.