Just so we're all on the same page:

RED LIGHT, non-schismatic - "The SSPX is not to be attended under any circuмstances, just like I wouldn't recommend attendance at the FSSP. The SSPX shouldn't be supported with your presence (which suggests to the OTHER parishioners that you approve of their new orientation), your donations, etc. So in all locations, you are to cease attendance at SSPX Mass centers, even if it means you no longer have access to Mass and the sacraments. The Novus Ordo is what took away your Sunday Mass. You simply don't have a sufficiently Trad option in your area. So it's not your fault. You avoid the SSPX just like you'd avoid a cultish Independent chapel or an Indult with various issues, etc. You're not necessarily declaring them non-Catholic just because you choose not to attend."

RED LIGHT, schismatic - "The SSPX is not to be attended under any circuмstances, because they are not Catholic. Attending an SSPX Mass is sinful, Communicatio in Sacris, etc."

YELLOW LIGHT - "The SSPX is clearly heading towards modernist Rome, the Novus Ordo, etc. Some chapels have serious enough problems that you have to leave them. Other chapels are still OK to attend. Keep your eyes open and use caution and prudence, as the situation is in flux. Attending or not attending varies by location and even sometimes by person. Also, I am working to support/build up the Resistance in my area, even though my SSPX chapel is one of the safe ones, because I see an SSPX deal as inevitable. I need to prepare, in order to make my family's Mass and Sacraments more secure. The situation is bound to deteriorate eventually, the way things are going."

GREEN LIGHT - "The SSPX is clearly heading towards modernist Rome, the Novus Ordo, etc. but the chapel closest to me seems to be fine. So I attend the SSPX 100%. I certainly DO NOT want the SSPX to change. I give lots of lip-service support to the Resistance, while not giving them any concrete expression of support: I don't go out of my way to attend Resistance-affiliated Masses in my area, even if the hard work of organizing them has been done for me. I don't give financial support to them (though I have the money), or I haven't attended one in a very long time (though I physically could attend, if I wanted to). I am involved at my SSPX chapel (which, as I said, is one of the safe ones) -- serving Mass, volunteering, etc. so I'm not available on the days the Resistance is having Mass in my area."

ACCORDISTA - "The SSPX *better be* making a deal with Rome, or they should be. It's a good thing. We need to make a deal with Rome, lest we end up schismatic like the Orthodox. The Resistance doesn't have the smallest shred of justification for existing."

ACCORDISTA, schismatic -  "The SSPX should be making a deal with Rome.  The Resistance doesn't have the smallest shred of justification for existing. Attending a Resistance Mass is sinful, and if you attend one you are a public sinner who should be considered excommunicated from all SSPX chapels. You say they have a valid Mass? Well, Black Masses are valid too! Yes, I suppose I am saying that the Resistance is not Catholic, like the Orthodox or Protestants. Yes, Martin Luther is a good analogy for the Resistance. All you can do to help your Resistance friends/priests is to pray for them. Yes, that's the same advice I gave you regarding your apostate cousin last week. Why do you ask?"

OSTRICH or THERE IS NO LIGHT - "The SSPX hasn't changed at all! I don't see anything. There is no evidence of any new orientation! Any idea that the SSPX has changed, is changing to be more liberal and accommodating of Vatican II, trying to make a deal with Rome, etc. is all a product of your fevered, diabolical imagination. Go to confession and you'll feel better!"

CULTIST - "I can't vouch for anything personally, but Fr. _____ essentially does my thinking for me. If you want me to listen to a given sermon, visit a given forum, attend Mass at a new location, etc. I need to run it by him first. I approve of the priests he approves. I approve of the Mass centers he approves."
NOTE: CULTISTs can be Accordistas OR Resistance!

WILLFUL SINNER or THE BAD-WILLED - "My position (any of the above) is true, and as a matter of fact God has given me a dispensation from the normal rules of morality to promote it. The end justifies the means! I can lie, slander, be grossly uncharitable to my fellow Catholics, distort the truth, or ignore the truth -- as long as it bolsters the position I've decided to be the truth. I can use sneaky tactics, deception, trickery, propaganda, public slander, and even techniques normally reserved to Freemasonic politicians, if it helps the cause."

This is very good.  There are some notable characteristics among some of these people.  For example, the ostriches tend to be more of the senior citizens who don't use the internet and rely on vhs tapes of Fr. Gruner question and answers to get information beyond the latest CFN issue.  The accordistas are generally the more liberal types who just happen to attend SSPX and don't have a clear sense of the fight, the are more liberal in things like TV and dress and think most of us are over doing it in many things.  The cultists who support the resistance are almost exclusively Pfeifferites, with some exceptions as far as positions on the papacy.  I think most of the red-lighters consider the SSPX non-Catholic because of the Doctrinal Declaration, but I'm not sure.  Everyone that I have ever heard has brought up the Communicatio in sacris and based it off of the FSSP position of the SSPX.  The green lighters seem to me to be the most likely to be a mixed bag.  The willful sinner is questionably (not probably) a believing Catholic, in my opinion.

I like purple lights.

Matthew, who are you to define the parameters of the various parameters you propose?

What are you babbling on about?

I'm not doing anything outside my powers as a simple layman. I am merely observing, learning, and then accurately cataloging the various positions -- the various reactions to the SSPX crisis.

If you think I am cataloging the various positions incorrectly, then please give testimony of what and where.

Frustrated lashing-out against the moderator will not get you far. On this or any other "sandbox".

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: Nickolas

Matthew, who are you to define the parameters of the various parameters you propose?

What are you babbling on about?

I'm not doing anything outside my powers as a simple layman. I am merely observing, learning, and then accurately cataloging the various positions -- the various reactions to the SSPX crisis.

If you think I am cataloging the various positions incorrectly, then please give testimony of what and where.

Frustrated lashing-out against the moderator will not get you far. On this or any other "sandbox".

Matthew, why do you feel the need to label people?  By labeling, is that not just what the SSPX leadership does and why play that game?  

Paul told the Phillippians to work out their own salvation.  Whether someone does that in an SSPX chapel, St. Pius V, independent chapel or where ever, labeling Catholics as you would is not yours to do.  

You're completely failing to comprehend. Who said anything about the various Trad groups? We're talking about reactions to the SSPX Crisis here, not the Crisis in the Church at large.

You don't even know me, so you aren't qualified to criticize me. You get an "F" grade in the subject of "knowing me" or sizing me up. You completely fail.

Have you read any of my posts besides this one? I'm the first in line to downplay "Trad group" loyalties, identities and politics. Fr. Trinh refers to them as "coats" which some Catholics feel the need to wear proudly, but are still quite optional and extra. Underneath the coats we are all first and foremost Catholics, and we need to keep sight of that. That is pretty much the mission statement of the independent chapel I run.

The purpose of my opening post seems to have been completely lost on you.

I was defining and cataloging the various stances one could have with regards to the SSPX crisis, especially those positions that are actually held by hundreds of individuals and referred to on a regular basis by countless Catholics on here. It's impossible to have a discussion unless we first define our terms. It's simple, really.

In talking with you, I honestly feel like I'm dealing with some kind of barrier -- an intellectual gulf, a language barrier, or something similar. I can't be that bad at communicating.