I am not sure that it is right to call a traditional priest in for someone who is not open to having him there...

In the case of my father (the original post of this thread) I asked my parents if they were open to having a traditional priest come and give my father Extreme Unction. I expected them to say no (they have been against my being traditional for years) but felt that it was my duty to at least ask and give them the option.  I don't know what moved them to agree and be open to it but they were.

It was a big deal for them to agree.  So when the SSPX just said to have a novus ordo priest go to them instead I was rather distraught.  Here my parents were finally agreeing to have traditional Sacraments through a traditional priest and the SSPX was denying it to them. 

Everyone sharing their stories has helped me to see that this is becoming more and more of a trend and that the SSPX are becoming less and less dependable for anyone who will not serve and commit to them first above all else. 

For me I will go with Saint Joan and say, "Dieu premier servi!" ("God first served!")

Snarky comments about a person "with a weak grasp of sacramental theology" do not contribute to such a serious matter.

He wasn't being snarky; you missed his point.

I have indeed been in that situation, with my father.  For several reasons, he was unable to receive Extreme Unction.  He would have had no issue whatsoever with receiving from a traditional priest, in fact, he was basically a sedevacantist, though he didn't have the theological underpinnings to be able to construct an argument for it, he just said "that man's no Pope".

The comment wasn't snarky.  I was simply referring to the fact that people who are uneducated in the Faith, or who simply can't understand certain distinctions, would not understand the difference between liciety and validity, would never have heard of ecclesia supplet, and would uninformedly reason something like "Vatican II changed all that stuff, and it's not supposed to be in Latin anymore (Latin versus vernacular is all that many people understand), that priest is using old prayers that aren't valid anymore", not understanding the difference between liciety and validity, nor understanding what makes a sacrament valid or invalid.  They could further reason that "schismatic [sic] confessions aren't valid, and neither are schismatic [sic] Last Rites", or WRT the Eucharist, "the Church doesn't allow the old Mass anymore, least of all celebrated by schismatics [again, sic], so that means it's not a valid Mass".  If pressed to say "do you mean it's not the Body and Blood of Christ", they might well respond "I dunno, I just know it's not a valid Mass, those guys aren't Catholics".  Not everyone knows what "valid" means WRT sacraments.

But at that point, why should it matter to a Novus Ordo adherent whether a priest offers traditional sacraments or post-Vatican II sacraments?  So far as I am aware, nobody in the Novus Ordo questions the validity or the efficacy of sacraments conferred in the old rites.  The only problem they would have, is with questions as to whether the priest has faculties or not, and in danger of death, even a Novus Ordo adherent should acknowledge that the church supplies faculties regardless.  Is there something I’m missing here?

On the other hand, I suppose it is possible that someone with a weak grasp of sacramental theology could think, oh, no, they’re not supposed to be doing it that way anymore, it’s not legitimate, and could conflate that with sacramental invalidity.

Does your dad plan to be buried or cremation?  If cremation, then trad priest will not give extreme unction.

You had some interesting professors during those years. Where is THAT professor, now??? Unfortunately, that is the human element in any society, but they were certainly undermining the position of the Society of which they were members. Liberals will always be there, it is a question of superiors being vigilant to weed them out before they can do too much damage. As you know, there is a litany of defections from the SSPX from the day of its establishment, to the left of Conciliarism and to the right of Sedevacantism. Which way did you go again???!!!!