Please elaborate.
The SSPX is like the Traditionalists’ punching bag. They’ve not been perfect, but I can assure not one single grupe is purists of the purists. But the SSPX represents Thomism better than any other group out there. Byzantines and Sedeprivationsists run a close third and second. But they abandon some principles of Thomism or never had them to begin with.
Thomism was canonized at the Council of Trent symbolically. It is the light that illuminates the path.
And that is where you will find your balance.
Dogmatic Sedevacantists will say that SSPX are in schism, while Resistance will say they are too cozy with Rome. Traditionalists themselves have painted SSPX into a corner where they are darned if they do and darned if they don’t. If they never consecrate bishops-see, they abandoned us. If they do consecrate bishops they are either schismatic or already made a secret deal with Rome. The problem with Traditional Catholicism is Traditional Catholics. Meanwhile, the SSPX pays no attention and focuses on the Thomistic way forward.
Many wild and imprudent speculations are already doing damage to the common good. Accusing them of secretly having chosen Bishops with Rome and all kinds of haste accusations. The Traditionalists do to SSPX what the modernists are not capable of: casting them in a negative light to right-minded Traditional Catholics.
I was at the Bishops Faure and Aquinas consecrations. I attended several episcopal consecrations at SGG. I profess allegiance to no group other than the Catholic Church.
The SSPX is not immune to criticism and far from perfect. But to attack these consecrations with wild accusations with no proof is a ridiculous example of what Traditional Catholic is or should strive to be.