CathInfo.com

You see, for some of us, it's has to do with the indefectibility of the Catholic Church. If all of the conciliar church hierarchy are suspect, then how can the Church ever right herself? Fr. Chazal said as much in his book "Contra Cekadam."

There's lots of problems with this way of thinking.

1.  Let's just assume that all the V2 clerics are valid.  They are still material/formal heretics.  They still don't have the Faith, whole and entire.  They still support pride masses, the new mass, false ecuмenism, Medjugorie (sp), etc.  They aren't helping anyone save their souls.  A heretic who is invalid is the same as a heretic who is valid -- they are still heretics.

2.  The Church, for the time being, has "righted itself" in the form of Tradition.  Just like during Arianism, which saints estimate over 90% of catholics were arian heretics, St Athanasius and his flock (and other clerics) kept the Faith.  Until the Church returned.

3.  The Church will always "right Herself" because God promised it.  Just because we can't see how it will happen, or when, doesn't mean it won't happen.  It's not our job to fix the Church; it's God's job.

4.  Indefectibility doesn't have to do with numbers.  If 99% of catholics defect, the 1% still hasn't.  God said that in the end times "the days will be shortened, for the sake of the elect".  This implies that times will be rough.  St Paul talks about the great "falling away" of the faithful.  If indefectibility were based on number of people, then both Christ's and St Paul's statements couldn't happen.  But indefectibility isn't affected by the majority of people.

5.  As long as there are Trad Bishops, then the Church has a hierarchy.  Every single V2 bishop could fall into formal heresy, but the existence of Trad Bishops (and also priests), means the hierarchy remains.

6.  I know of 2 prophecies about the current crisis that talk of world wars and persecution and chaos.  It is said that somewhere in europe, a handful of laity and clerics survive the chaos (not knowing that the pope had already died).  Sts Peter and Paul appear to them and choose who is the new pope.

The Church will survive.  We don't judge sacraments (i.e. the new rites) based on the future.  We judge them based on facts and errors within the text.  The new rites are doubtful and God knows they are doubtful.  This is God's crisis, which He is allowing to happen.  God knew this crisis would happen, down to the very last detail, from all eternity, even on the first day of the world. 

He knows all, sees all, plans all, fixes all, and protects all that He wills.  Nothing happens that He did not allow, did not know about, or cannot control or fix.  This crisis will be over when He says so and the Church will be restored in full measure and in full glory.

  The sspx says it's 100% valid.  Sedes say 100% invalid.  Both are extremes.  I say it's doubtful.  So do you, as you admit "I don't know either way".  So why are you defending the sspx?  Unless you just want to argue.

Now you are finally hitting on the whole point.

That point being - both sides claim to KNOW exactly what makes the NO ordinations valid and what does not, which means for the ones who SHOULD know, validity / invalidity / doubt are all knowable with certainty, WHICH MEANS that the argument is *not* that the NO ordinations are always doubtful as you keep insisting, rather, for the SSPX validity always depends on whether or not it was done by the book, and for the sedes it simply means always invalid.

SSPX = certain that they are always valid if done by the book.
Sedes = certain that they are always invalid. 
Us = certain that they are always doubtful.

I am not defending the SSPX, I already said what I'd do if I were the one deciding the matter. I am telling you that because both sides claim to know with certainty exactly what it takes for validity / invalidity, the argument is between those two, not us, and their argument will never end. 

For me, I am in total agreement with  Fr. Wathen:

"....(The reader is reminded that the very doubt which this change creates serves the malevolent purposes of the conspirators as well as does the certitude of invalidity, because from the doubt flows controversy, disagreements, factions, confusion, and disquietude among the clergy and the faithful.) . . . .Furthermore, in view of what the other changes in the liturgical rites have connoted, we are compelled to be suspicious...
...The new form could not be an improvement on the old. How can one method or set of words ordain someone better than another? The alteration of the form can only have had the intention of either negating this purpose, or, at the very least, of creating a doubt as to its efficacy. (As if it needs to be said: They could not have added something to the form by taking words away. And what could they have wanted to add to the power of Orders? Why did they touch the form at all?)..." - Father Wathen, Who Shall Ascend?