Exactly.  They are doubtful, thus conditional ordinations are to be used.  That’s the entire reason why “conditional” sacramental formulas exist…for unclear circuмstances. 


If the new rite was used, conditional ordination/consecration is required.  It’s as simple as that. 

The new-sspx has made it complicated because they want to be friends with new-rome, so they hold out the possibility that some new-rite priests/bishops aren’t doubtful.  This is not so.  If new rites are used, this is evidence enough of the need for a conditional re-do. 

Stubborn, +ABL’s approach to investigate ordinations was logical because in the 70s-80s you still had valid novus ordo bishops who, even if they used the new rite of ordination, could validly ordain.  The most problematic parts of the new rite are for episcopal consecrations.  Thus, as time went on, the old, valid bishops all died.

For the last 20 yrs (at least), all New rite bishops are HIGHLY doubtful.  Even if they ordain/consecrate others in the true rite, it’s also HIGHLY doubtful.  There’s no need to investigate; they’re all doubtful. 

The new-sspx’s policy is expired and illogical.  But we know they are keeping it for nefarious and political reasons, to destroy Tradition by harboring more and more doubtful clerics.  It’s evil and we cannot condone such actions.

but that's very easy for me to insist upon because I am not the one risking committing a sacrilege - they are.

I agree, it is also MY OPINION that *all* NO priests should be re/conditionally ordained across the board and every time without fail. But that is only our opinion and in reality is up to whomever is tasked with doing the re/conditional ordinations. It simply is. You can slam the SSPX all day long for this, but in their initially presuming validity, they are doing what the Church has always done.

This does not apply to V2, which changed the words of the sacraments.

V2 sacraments prove themselves as doubtful, because the words changed.  This is all the doubt that is required. 

You're comparing apples (Traditional sacraments) and oranges (V2 sacraments) but you're falsely applying apple-rules to oranges.  Doesn't work this way...except for the new-sspx, which wants to pretend that oranges are apples.

V2's sacraments are "anti-Trent" as Ottaviani said.  Trent's protections/guidelines don't apply.

Canon Law says that a doubtful sacrament is treated as if it's invalid.  Theoretically, we are not saying that ALL novus ordo sacraments are invalid.  But PRACTICALLY, yes, canon law tells us we must treat them as such.  If there is positive doubt (i.e. factual evidence which causes doubt) then canon law applies.