CathInfo.com

They can of course be doubtful. Each case has to be investigated. Did Bp. Tissier conditionally ordain all Novus Ordo priests who went over to the SSPX? Do you have any evidence of that? As far as I know, the Society never changed how they go about dealing with NO priests who go over to them.

They maintain the theory, but changed the practice.

The theory was always bad, because they have always said that the possible problem was the intention of the ordaining (or consecrating) bishop, when the real problem is the form, but, in practice, up until 2012, they always ordained conditionally almost all the converted Novus Ordo priests who joined their ranks, with a few infamous exceptions.

Now they almost never ordain anyone conditionally at all, so, they did change. They just did not have to change their theory, because it was already made in view of a possible agreement with the Modernists. It was already a compromised position.

This issue has been around for 40 years.  The sspx leadership doesn't "know better". 

2)  The "by the book" argument only applied in the 70s/80s when there were still OLD RITE BISHOPS doing new-rite ordinations.  Those are less problematic.
But all those bishops are dead.  So that argument is over.  Time has run out.  No longer applies.
Yeah, and he was conditionally ordained before he died...allegedly. Fr Hesse's argument in one of his videos was, "I feel like it's valid." 
+Tissier disagreed with them.  So did Michael Davies.  So did many others, who compare the consecration rite with the already-condemned rite of the Anglicans (the errors are the same).

This is irrelevant.  There ARE valid novus ordo priests, no one debates this.  But we DON'T KNOW which ones are valid.  That's the point.

Yes, it's amazing how few people get the "point" of the argument, but are all over the map, likely due to a need so soothe their own consciences.

Sorry, but when it comes to Fr. Hesse's ordination, they and he did know better, better than you and better than me - that much is certain. 

How do they know better?  The facts are the facts.  An "investigation" can't change the facts -- you obviously have swallowed the new-sspx's lie that it can.

a.  The new rite of ordination was changed.  Fact.
b.  The new rite's changes cause doubt.  Fact.
c.  "Fr" Hesse said he was ordained in the new rite.  He does not dispute this.  Fact.
d.  We know what the new rite says, because it's a public docuмent.  Fact.
e.  Ergo, "Fr" Hesse's ordination is doubtful, because it was done using a doubtful rite.  Fact.

I am not defending the SSPX's policy,

If you keep arguing that they "know better" then you absolutely are defending their policy.  Because they don't know better.

a.  New rite is a public docuмent.
b.  New rite does not have variations; there is only 1 way to say the new rite of ordination.
c.  Fr Hesse said he was ordained in the new rite.  No variations.
d.  Ergo, we all know EXACTLY how the rite was performed, what was said, etc.  There's "nothing else" to know. 

There is no mystery to be solved.  There is no investigation needed to uncover "secret" facts.  The rite is known, it was used.  No one disputes this.  Those are the only facts that matter.
 

but the SSPX *STILL* believe that NO ordinations are valid when done by the book.

Then they are the indult.  Because no Traditionalist, going back to the early 1970s, trusted the new rites.  That's why Trads started their own seminaries.

IF, "when done by the book" the new rite ordinations are valid, then they are just as valid now as they were then 

   Not hardly.  The problem with the new rite of ordination is two-fold:

1.  New rite is doubtful.
2.  The new rite for bishops is also doubtful.

So you have a doubtful bishop ordaining a doubtful priest.  2 doubts.

In the 70s/80s, there were *some* old rite/true bishops.  If a true bishop ordains in the new rite, that is still doubtful, but it's only 1 doubt.  Slightly less doubt, but it still exists.

I agree that WE don't know - but that's *not* the point. The point is that the SSPX SAY that they *do* know. 

This is the beginning of their contradiction and lies.  They say:  All new rites are valid.

As such, they are adhering to what the Church has always done by investigating each NO priest's ordination that comes to them. It's not complicated. 

  The Church only did an investigation WITH DOUBTFUL ORDERS.  

So the new-sspx wants us all to believe that "new rites are valid" ...but also...we will investigate.  If you do an investigation, YOU ARE ADMITTING THERE IS DOUBT.

Ergo, their contradiction that "new rites are valid" is bogus.