I’m confused as to how the SSPX can be considered schismatic, but not heretical. By claiming that our last few popes and the Second Vatical Council are all invalid/wrong/heretical/antiChrists, I’m confused as to how they aren’t heretics? Isn’t the idea of papal infallibility and the infallibility of councils that are presided over by the pope, dogmatic? As such, I’m confused as to how one can reject a council and not be a heretic? Then again, the basic premise of my concern can very well be wrong by either a) papal/concilliar infallibility not being dogmatic or b) the SSPX not having the stances I’ve noted as being official (I know several SSPX adherents who claim what I’ve noted).
Regardless, it’s sad to note that almost every council in Church history has led to schisms. Every group leaving Mother Church, because they felt they knew/know better than her, is very sad and short sighted. This to me seems no different than any of the Protestant reformers. It simply boils down to authority and as pious as they may try to act, the SSPX isn’t more Catholic than the Pope.