So, the Sanford Florida SSPX Priory chapel is now allowing a Novus Ordo ordained man to perform the Latin Mass, and has put the SSPX congregation in a position of unknowingly attending a false mass, false confession, and false communion.

Instead of guarding the flock, they sold out to the  wolves.

The SSPX has been doing this for years, as far back as in the days of Archbishop Lefebvre.  Archbishop Lefebvre recognized the validity of the new rite of ordination. He did not require conditional ordination for priests wishing to work with the SSPX but only did so if the priest had doubts.  There was a Fr Stark in the early days who was a Jesuit ordained in the new rite and worked with the SSPX, another was Fr Glover who was a canon lawyer.  Neither were conditionally ordained.  Archbishop Lefebvre even used the new rite himself when he ordained Fr Cottard in 1973 at Fontgombault. Fr Cottard is still in the SSPX and attended the General Chapter which elected Fr Pagliarani.  No doubt there were, and are, others.

So a novus ordo priest saying Mass in an SSPX chapel shouldn’t be surprising.  There were some SSPX priests who met with Archbishop Lefebvre in the early 1980s and requested that he institute a policy that all novus ordo priests who work with the SSPX be conditionally ordained, because, like you, they were deeply concerned about people unknowingly attending a false mass, false confession, and false communion.  Sadly, the Archbishop refused and, instead of listening to the concerns of priests wishing to guard their flocks, he expelled them.  There were nine of them.

The SSPX has not only had novus ordo priests, but they now have a retired bishop in Switzerland saying “Mass” and no doubt hearing “confessions”.  But this is not a new thing either.  There was a retired bishop from the Philippines, Bishop Lazo, who began helping the SSPX in the late 1990s.  He also did “confirmations” and assisted at ordinations.

I certainly do not agree with any of this, and find it irresponsible to say the least.  I am only pointing it out because many people believe this to be a recent problem, but unfortunately it isn’t.  Archbishop Lefebvre wasn't perfect after all.

The whole point of the SSPX was to form and educate in order to obtain holy priests.

I don't accept that it was ever the "whole point." 
+ABL wanted to maintain tradition for the Church, since men came to him to ask him what they should do about not being able to find a decent Catholic seminary. It was also about retaining proper Catholic teaching, along with proper formation. Due to Econe speaking out against Vll, Rome sent a visitation to the seminary. That's when things began to unravel, but +ABL stood firm in maintain tradition, even though he was eventually suspended, and he was told to not ordain any more priests. But he didn't listen to Modernist Rome.
So you see, it wasn't only about forming and educating. it was also about speaking out against error.

The SSPX has been doing this for years, as far back as in the days of Archbishop Lefebvre.  Archbishop Lefebvre recognized the validity of the new rite of ordination. He did not require conditional ordination for priests wishing to work with the SSPX but only did so if the priest had doubts.  There was a Fr Stark in the early days who was a Jesuit ordained in the new rite and worked with the SSPX, another was Fr Glover who was a canon lawyer.  Neither were conditionally ordained.  Archbishop Lefebvre even used the new rite himself when he ordained Fr Cottard in 1973 at Fontgombault. Fr Cottard is still in the SSPX and attended the General Chapter which elected Fr Pagliarani.  No doubt there were, and are, others.

So a novus ordo priest saying Mass in an SSPX chapel shouldn’t be surprising.  There were some SSPX priests who met with Archbishop Lefebvre in the early 1980s and requested that he institute a policy that all novus ordo priests who work with the SSPX be conditionally ordained, because, like you, they were deeply concerned about people unknowingly attending a false mass, false confession, and false communion.  Sadly, the Archbishop refused and, instead of listening to the concerns of priests wishing to guard their flocks, he expelled them.  There were nine of them.

The SSPX has not only had novus ordo priests, but they now have a retired bishop in Switzerland saying “Mass” and no doubt hearing “confessions”.  But this is not a new thing either.  There was a retired bishop from the Philippines, Bishop Lazo, who began helping the SSPX in the late 1990s.  He also did “confirmations” and assisted at ordinations.

I certainly do not agree with any of this, and find it irresponsible to say the least.  I am only pointing it out because many people believe this to be a recent problem, but unfortunately it isn’t.  Archbishop Lefebvre wasn't perfect after all.

1) Fr. Peter Scott wrote an article insisting on the conditional ordination of all conciliar clergy, which would seem to oppose your claims;
2) Regarding Bishop Lazo, though he was not consecrated Bishop in the old Rite, he was ordained priest in the old Rite, and in necessity a simple priest can be given supplied jurisdiction to confirm.

1) Fr. Peter Scott wrote an article insisting on the conditional ordination of all conciliar clergy, which would seem to oppose your claims;
2) Regarding Bishop Lazo, though he was not consecrated Bishop in the old Rite, he was ordained priest in the old Rite, and in necessity a simple priest can be given supplied jurisdiction to confirm.

Fr Peter Scott has one opinion, Archbishop Lefebvre had another (which changed throughout the years).  Fr X has another opinion, Fr Y has another.  That is the SSPX in a nutshell.  And so everyone has a different opinion on a whole range of issues (pope or no pope - Catholic or conciliar church - new ordinations rites valid or invalid - old or new fast and abstinence laws - old or new holy days of obligation - strictly 1962 missal or bits of the pre-1955 missal thrown in - "deal with Rome" good or bad), and that is why the SSPX is in such a mess.

With regards to Bishop Lazo, the 1917 Code of Canon Law required a simple priest to obtain permission from the Holy See to administer the Sacrament of Confirmation.  The 1983 Code apparently allows the diocesan bishop to grant permission.  Bishop Lazo presumably had none of the required permissions (since he was working with the SSPX at the time) so they are objectively invalid.  The supplied jurisdiction card has been played to death.  You cannot rely on supplied jurisdiction willy-nilly, otherwise there is no point to ordinary jurisdiction and of having a hierarchy.

OK, I found the information on the Novus Ordo priest’s name, he is Fr. David Phillipson, here’s a link from CI from when he was at Phoenix: https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/sspx-transfer-this-summer/

In the link one will find that this FR. Phillipson was transferred in August 2017 from the SSPX Phoenix chapel to the Benedictine Monastery in Silver City, New Mexico.  My question is why would they need him or any priest in the monastery since they had at least two Benedictine priests their already? I would think that having the choice  of a Novus Ordo ordained priest or an SSPX ordained Benedictine priest for mass created quite a stir.