CathInfo.com

It truly is ridiculous to doubt the validity of the Thuc consecrations.  I have in my files somewhere an original letter written by Abp. Thuc himself written in Latin in attestation of the fact that he had done the consecrations.  For heaven's sake, Fr. Gerard des Laurier was a canon lawyer to Pius XII.  Am I supposed to believe that he is going to run off and get consecrated by some man who does not have his wits?

Here is the problem with consecrations:  Let us say that bishop A consecrates bishops B,C,D,and E.  But let us say that bishop D runs off and becomes a liberal and consecrates bishop F, who is also a liberal.  Now people will heap all kinds of opprobrium on bishop A because he consecrated some guy who went haywire. It is terribly emotional and illogical to questions bishops A,B,C and E because bishop D does something crazy. At some point perhaps the lineage of bishop D does become suspect, but this does not call into question the aforementioned bishops.

Here is a statement that Bishop Moises Carmona gave of his own episcopal consecration:  Bing Videos In the case of Abp. Vigano referring to the current NO hierarchy as "my brother bishops," I would never do such a thing.  These NO bishops are all of them, to a man, consecrated with the new forms of consecration.  All of their orders can and should be legitimately called into doubt. At most I would say to them, "My brother bishops, if brothers you be, you have, all of you, partaken of the new orders, the New Mass, the Revolution.  We traditional Catholics must call into question your orders..."  Abp. Vigano is just not there yet.  We must pray for him.

You're a smart man. I'm surprised you are following this issue with such lack of care in your reading.

The issue is potential doubt. For his withholding intention. It cannot be established with certainty that the withholding of intention for the Palmarians was also applied in the other situations where he consecrated.