Old news.
You got me thinking, though, and something needs to be said here.
When you have an organization the size of the SSPX, there is no "monolithic reality" or "flavor" that you are going to encounter everywhere you go within that organization.
When you're talking about ONE priest, or ONE chapel, then you're NOT discussing realities that everyone would probably observe if they checked it out for themselves.
But say you found out that an SSPX priest was involved in a lawsuit 16 years ago. Does that mean "SSPX" must be crossed off your "potential Trad chapels" list? By no means!
That's because it's not fundamental to the SSPX, or indicative of what you're likely to encounter when you visit one of their chapels.
If a foreigner visited the mountains of Colorado, would it be accurate for him to say "It's too cold in America -- I don't like it that cold." and cross off "America" from his "future vacation spots" list? That would be pretty stupid -- he's never seen Arizona or a few thousand other locations that are downright hot.
Even if I found out about downright serious crimes being committed by two or three SSPX priests, I'd still keep going to the SSPX. Why not? Unless the crimes are being fostered by their formation in the SSPX seminaries -- which would make it a widespread problem -- there are no fundamental reasons to avoid SSPX priests.
We're used to the Novus Ordo, where priests are fundamentally "of the world" and experience things like Freudian psychology, sex ed, worldly movies, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ doctrine, etc. during their seminary years. So I avoid all Novus Ordo priests for good reason; most of them have had a poor/defective formation. They all have modernism in their blood at the very least. That's a FUNDAMENTAL problem which affects MOST Novus Ordo priests.
If you want to criticize the SSPX, first of all you have my permission, but it must be based on facts.