The SSPX is hanging on to the lex orandi of 2k years - the result is the unchanged lex credendi - something the modernist church authorities despise.
If SSPX is already lost, it is in very good company.
I am no SSPXer, but I do admire them for their preservation of the Holy Sacrifice and Catholic teachings, without them any reference at all to the teachings of the Perennial Magisterium would be burried in the land of modernist ambiguities.
You put in very stark terms what this is all about for the SSPXers: it's about deafeating fellow Catholics.
But the novus ordo has all but defeated fellow Catholics, if SSPX ever accepts the new mass, I think it would serve to show their defeat.
So, you try to have it both ways.
You "admire" the SSPX for preserving Catholic teachings, yet you remain in the Church headed by that horned modernist, John Paul II.
If the SSPX never accepts the Novus Ordo, it will always remain outside the walls, period.
My own opinion is that Fellay and Williamson and crowd better get the best deal they can while JPII is still alive.
There's no sympathy for them among the Curia, and the next Pope will not likely put up with the headaches they cause.
They are destined to become the next "Old Catholic" sect.
The 1962 Missal is 2000 years old?
From time immemorial the ecclesiastical hierarchy has exercised this right in matters liturgical. It has organized and regulated divine worship, enriching it constantly with new splendor and beauty, to the glory of God and the spiritual profit of Christians. What is more, it has not been slow - keeping the substance of the Mass and sacraments carefully intact - to modify what it deemed not altogether fitting, and to add what appeared more likely to increase the honor paid to Jesus Christ and the august Trinity, and to instruct and stimulate the Christian people to greater advantage.The sacred liturgy does, in fact, include divine as well as human elements. The former, instituted as they have been by God, cannot be changed in any way by men. But the human components admit of various modifications, as the needs of the age, circumstance and the good of souls may require, and as the ecclesiastical hierarchy, under guidance of the Holy Spirit, may have authorized. This will explain the marvelous variety of Eastern and Western rites. Here is the reason for the gradual addition, through successive development, of particular religious customs and practices of piety only faintly discernible in earlier times. Hence likewise it happens from time to time that certain devotions long since forgotten are revived and practiced anew. All these developments attest the abiding life of the immaculate Spouse of Jesus Christ through these many centuries ... Private individuals, therefore, even though they be clerics, may not be left to decide for themselves in these holy and venerable matters ... the sacred liturgy, as We have said, is entirely subject to the discretion and approval of the Holy See ... No more can any Catholic in his right senses repudiate existing legislation of the Church to revert to prescriptions based on the earliest sources of canon law. Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation. (Pius XII, Mediator Dei 49-50,58,60,63)
Of course, for Lefebvrists, divine Providence no longer oversees the Church: "Rome would remain far from the Tradition. And it would be the end of the Church ... his ideas are heretical ... and they lead to heresy ... it seems that the Holy Spirit has taken a vacation" (Msgr. Lefebvre, qtd. in 30 Days, 1988, July/August).