CathInfo.com

I can understand how most here have a doubt as to the validity of any NO priest who goes over to the SSPX, but I myself assume that each case will be investigated properly, as it always has been done in the SSPX. You provide Fr. Hesse as a good example, though he's rarely mentioned on this forum anymore, unfortunately.

How can you, aligned as you are with the Resistance, but so stupid?  That the SSPX would "investigate properly".  There is no "investigation" that could make up for the radical changes the the Novus Ordo Rite of Episcopal Consecration that clearly establish a positive doubt.  You cannot "investigate" that away.  In fact, they do the exact opposite of what Pope Leo XIII teachines in "Apostolicae Curae" in attempting to determine whether any given bishop or priest had the right intention in using the New Rite.  Pope Leo XIII teaches explicitly that the intention is a matter for the internal forum and cannot "per se" be known or "investigated", but that what was invalidating about the Anglican Rite was the intention of the Rite as can be determined in the text itself.

This is clearly you just wanting to just accept whatever SSPX says because you don't want to be bothered or troubled by it.

The non-conditionally ordained "Fr" Isaac Relyea is doing a mission in Post Falls this week as well as hearing confessions. Sadly, these confessions may be invalid.

The ironic thing is the sermon he gave at one of the Masses this past Sunday was far better than any I have ever heard from any Society priest.

There have been 2 Novus Ordo priests this past week(?) that have joined the Society, one being from Minneapolis. I suspect they won't be conditionally ordained either. Really problematic.

Yep.  And here I was thinking that after being "excommunicated" SSPX could drop the facade of making compromises for the sake of some kind of attempts toward regularization.  But perhaps now they've committed themselves so firmly to this position that they would lose too much credibility to backtrack now.

SSPX's position on this issue is absolutely one of the most scandalous things they do, since it involves putting souls at risk WITHOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION WHATSOEVER.

Their latest round of arguments involves gross dishonesty where they try to conflate the notion that re-administering a "character" Sacrament like Holy Orders entails sacrilege, so they must do some serious investigation before "re-ordaining" someone.  Ridiculous.  That's the whole point of the conditional form, so in no case would there be a sacrilege.  If you did it for no reason, based on negative doubt or scruple, or "just in case", without positive doubt, then you could more "loosely" cause offense to the Sacrament, but so long as there's any prudent doubt whatsoever, it's permissible and there's no sin in doing it.

So, worst case if Orders are valid and you're wrong in conditionally ordaning?  Nothing.  No "re-ordination" occurs.  Yet the faithful who have concerns can be at peace.

Worst case if Orders are not valid and you're wrong in not conditionally ordaining?  Faithful gettting invalid Sacraments, and possibly the damnation of souls if some soul who does not have perfect contrition passes way being absolved by a Fake Priest.

Given the consequences of being wrong one way or the other ... there's a grave moral obligation to conditionally ordain, and objectively the SSPX commit grave sin by taking this position and are risking their own damnation.

This needs to stop immediately.

p.s.  Fr Relyea and Fr Hesse are doubtful.  All new rite priests are, no exceptions.  The rite itself is doubtful, no matter how much gaslighting the new-sspx attempts.  They can’t change facts.