Call it what you will, but I was not in any way making a reference to the SSPX. Why do you have to do that?
I dont care what we want to call the institutional structure of the....the "church"......"post-conciliar church"........it really does not matter.
IN using the term "NO", I am referring to the regular Novus Ordo Church. I am not referring to the SSPX, SSPV, FSSP Indult masses, nor independant chapel. All of these groups would style themselves as being Roman Catholic, and as adhering to/professing the traditional faith of the church.
AS a sociologist, I would lump these all together as various flavors of "Traditionalism" in Catholicism, as compared to the regular institutional NO Catholic Church.
By use of that term, I am simply trying to make a distinction - to qualify WHOM I am referring to. That is a lot different from saying "who is better".
Thus, in the use of that term, I have clarified whom I am referring to - in my observations of mass going trends.
I refuse to get dragged into another fruitless "SSPX discussion". I will however state that the future of the Church does indeed lie in those who seek out and follow Tradition.
SSPV is plainly schismatic, so is simply not Catholic. Indult masses are still performed by N.O. priests in N.O. churches, so are part of the N.O. church. Note that the first thing that happens any of the several times an idult priest gets caught having sex with boys, the first thing every one points out is "Oh, they're N.O. priests."
That leaves SSPX as being the prinary Catholic, but not N.O. group. I was decidedly leaving the SSPX as part of the Catholic church, so I wasn't trying to start a debate about them, but finding them insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
SSPX can claim high attendance levels for the simple reason new Protestant churches can: almost by definition, their members attend church.