Greetings,

My brother lives in Pittsburgh, and is leaning orthodox. I'm trying to steer him to the Catholic Church.

I've got him interested in Ukrainian Catholic priest, Fr. Jason Charron. 

Should I be worried about the validity of Fr. Charron's Orders?

Thank you!

Bishop who ordained him: wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Mikhail_Moskal

Oh, thank you both!!!

I will watch the video now!!!!

I believe I met Fr. Charron once.  Seems to be a good priest and orthodox (lower case), rejecting Bergoglio's heresies but more R&R in view of papacy.  He's married, as are a lot of Eastern priests.

I read he has seven children, God bless him!

I read he has seven children, God bless him!

Yes. His wife's name is Hilyna, I think that's how you spell it. 

Sort of ... it's not quite the same "una cuм" formula, but they pray for the "Pope of Rome".

I disagree with the "una cuм" position anyway, since it's not what the dogmatic anti-una-cuм types hold it to be.  Ironically, one of the two or three most anti-una-cuм group happens to be that of Bishop Sanborn.  But, as a sedeprivationist, one could EASILY make a case for inserting the name there due to his being a material pope.  Fr. Chazal, who's position is a slight variation on sedeprivationism, refers to the [material] pope as a "visible sign" of unity, i.e. just saying, "I'm a Catholic and profess submission to the pope."

St. Vincent Ferrer offered his Masses "una cuм [the wrong guy]" for quite some time.  In no way were those Masses displeasing to God due to material error.

Many moderate SVs, SSPV and CMRI, believe that you're not somehow formally adhering to Bergoglio's schismatic AntiChurch by assisting at a Mass where the priest puts his name in there.  Besides that, what the priest does is between him and God.

Dimond Brothers had a good study on the matter, and they are about as dogmatic SV as they get.

I have no issues assisting at Ukrainian Catholic churches if I feel the need to benefit from the Sacraments.

I've got one more question. I presume that the Byzantine Rite has some kind of an una cuм in its formulary. Is that correct?

I ask because there's a monthly UCGG Mass in my area, at a novus ordo church. I'm wondering if I could go there for an extra Mass per month.

It seems an Eastern Rite una cuм is less odious than an SSPX una cuм. But maybe I'm just being extremely dishonest.

I would unfortunately have to avoid if it's a Novus Ordo church because that means there is regularly sacrilege committed there

I really appreciate your thoughts here. For me, the "SSPX una cuм" is absolutely perfidious ...

That's absurd.  Then at the same time you're sending someone to the Ukrainians who profess to be in Communion with the Conciliar Popes, regardless of the technicality of whether there's a formula you can live with.  That's totally Pharisaical.

You're more obsessed with (your interpretation of) the wording of a formula rather than with the reality.  Ukrainians are more "in union with" the Conciliars than the SSPX are.  There can be a hundred reasons for putting the name of Bergoglio into the Canon short of professing adherence to his errors, from "give him the benefit of the doubt" to "only the Church has the authority to despose a pope", some variation of sedeprivationist thinking, such as he's the visible source of unity, to actual sedeprivationism that can justify doing this.  I know of no SSPX priest who adheres to Jorge's errors (well, except on the points where the SVs are even worse, such as regarding EENS).  That's why they're in the SSPX and not FSSP ... apart from one or two perhaps who went to SSPX because they got kicked out by FSSP.

Focus on the reality of the situation and not your interpretation of the forumla.  Church's attitude about the matter is not yours.

Your language about "odious" and "perfidious" are dead giveaways for how you're operating on pure emotion.  I despise and regularely denounce the Conciliar heresies as much as the next guy, but that shouldn't prevent me from rationally considering the matter.

It is possible for a priest to put the name in there in good faith without that insertion of the name being tantamount to professing adherence to the Conciliar errors, for any number of reasons, in which case it would amount to a material error in the same category as when St. Vincent Ferrer put the wrong name in the Canon.