CathInfo.com

You already did guess and acted accordingly.

Laughing a little is not adult-like? I’m trying to help people in here not be so overly serious. People are so sensitive these days! Please, don’t be a cream puff.

Earlier you wanted proof he wasn’t a traditionalist did you not? I provided it to you. He was a liberal even at Vatican II. I didn’t see a reason to provide commentary because it was all there, and to me the point was obvious. Do you stop and think for awhile or just react to whatever is said to you in opposition, in this conversation?

It is important because traditionalism is the only way to excuse or explain doing these consecrations in private, or doing them at all. So, it contributes to us asking, what was he up to? Because every time he was caught, he treated the Novus Ordo as though it had a legitimate authority to excommunicate, and he repented every time. Of course, this in itself is not enough to prove invalidity, but should lead us to look into it further, and take it into account along with every other piece of evidence I have shared, in my long post. The burden of proof that these consecrations took place in a Catholic manner is on them who were there, and those who claim it.

I suppose St. Alphonsus Liguori in his own moral theology was stupid for having an entire section dedicated to discussing the sacraments? I suppose the Catholic Encyclopedia was wrong to address the validity of the sacraments using moral theology? This is what I mean about being absurd in your replies.

Approaching the sacraments is absolutely a moral issue, because we are forbidden from receiving them from clergy whose orders are questionable, and saying to oneself “it probably is” is not enough certitude to act in accordance with the law of God.

You should really read my original, long post, everything is there, again, I am only quoting other authorities, I give all the sources, it is not my opinion. Things would be clearer if you did this. Have you?