Bergoglio was ordained post-1968 and wasn't concecrated until 1992. I have inferred that many of you, as am I, troubled by even so much as a converted "priest?" who has not been conditionally ordained, saying even a single Mass as a visiting priest at an SSPX chapel. How do you square that with accepting Bergoglio hook, line, & sinker? A layman is a layman folks--whether it's some sinister old creep like Ambrose likely out scheming solely for personal grandeur & gain, or whether it's somebody at the other end of piety duped into submitting himself to an invalid rite--the person's status remains layman either way.
I thought that the R&R/SSPX generally believed that the post VII sacraments are not invalid.
Yes, they do believe they are valid - when Fr Cekada wrote his first article arguing for invalidity of the new rite of Episcopal Consecration two SSPX priests wrote responses arguing for the validity of the new rite (one of them was Fr Calderon I think).
Yes...which just so happened to coincide with the first "pope" consecrated a bishop in the New Rite (Benedict XVI). :scratchchin:
Fr hesse can shed some light.
The point is this:
1. The New Sacrament of ordination, given the way they are changed is an act of schism by the Pope.
2. Therefore they ought to be judged in the same way the Church judges schismatic sacraments.
3. Given that the form of the New sacraments is more explicit than the Old form (ironically), they are therefore most certainly valid.
Compare the forms:
Latin Roman Rite:
["Perfect in Thy priest the fullness of thy ministry and, clothing him in all the ornaments of spiritual glorification, sanctify him with the Heavenly anointing."]
Novus Ordo Schismatic Rite:
"And now pour forth on this chosen one that power which is from you, the governing Spirit, whom you gave to your beloved Son Jesus Christ, whom be gave to the holy Apostles, who founded the Church in every place as your sanctuary, unto the glory and unending praise of your name."
notice the governing spirit makes explicit reference to the power of jurisdiction.
So, treated as a separate rite of schismatics, it is most certainly valid, especially since what everyone is saying up to that point is: "We are going to make a bishop."