But how many are undoubtedly, certain priests?
The SSPX has an article showing the new rite of episcopal consecrations is certainly valid.
http://sspx.org/en/validity-new-rite-episcopal-consecrations Indeed, since it is derived from eastern rites, specifically the Coptic and West Syrian ones, (which is a mistake imo, done for ecuмenical reasons, but not a mistake that causes invalidity - and it is not possible for ancient eastern rites to be invalid), the new rite could not be invalid without those ancient and eastern rites also being invalid, which is impossible.
"The two rites are the Coptic rite, used in Egypt, and the Western Syrian rite, used notably by the Maronites.[75] Let us note in passing that these two rites are perfectly Catholic. This has nothing to do with the rites of “schismatic and heretical Abyssinians,” as one “Coomaraswamist” pontificated on the Internet on July 11, 2005. Beside the fact that neither the Maronites nor the Copts are Abyssinian,[76] this Internet pontificator apparently does not know that the Eastern “schismatics and heretics” use the same rites as the Catholics. To assure ourselves of the validity of Pope Paul VI’s rite, it will suffice for us to place side by side the new consecratory prayer and the two Eastern rites in question. The validity of these two rites can in no wise be called into question, otherwise the Coptic Church (Catholic as well as Orthodox) and the Syrian Church (which includes the Maronites) would have neither bishops nor priests, nor would they ever have had them. We have prepared a four-column comparison (refer Table 3: Four-column comparison of 1968 edition with Hippolytus text, Coptic and Maronite Rites) with, in order from left to right, Pope Paul VI’s new consecratory prayer,[77] the Latin version of the Apostolic Tradition [i.e., “of Hippolytus”—Ed.],[78] the Coptic rite, and the Syrian rite. For the latter two texts we have used the Denzinger translation.[79] With the four prayers transcribed into the same language, the comparison is made easy."
See Table 3 here
http://sspx.org/en/table-3-validity-new-episcopal-consecrationsThis very scholarly study by the SSPX should settle the issue. Beside it, there is also the fact pointed out even by Bp. Williamson, that Eucharistic Miracles have occurred at Masses said by Priests Ordained in the New Rite, which shows that neither rite is per se invalid.
It's possible to be against this kind of east-west ecuмenist syncretism without needlessly and inaccurately exaggerating the matter.
People will disagree, I guess. But for the SSPX and most Indult Groups, the study has settled the matter and we move on. :cheers:
I agree, Stubborn, that there was a vocations crisis in the decades after Vatican II. The facts show that clearly, both in the Priesthood and in Religious Life. The number of Priests in the world today however is around 415,000, that's still a considerable number even after the decline, "Between 1970 and 2012, the number of priests declined from 419,728 to 414,313.[2]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priest_shortage_in_the_Catholic_Church Before Vatican II, the ratio of Priests:Faithful was about 1:1000. Now, it's closer to approaching 1:3000. Those are the statistics. In some countries, the Priest shortage is more acute.
The number of Priests offering the Traditional Mass is now around 1.2% of that number. When it reaches at least 10-15%, around 50-60,000, if the total remains around 420 K, Tradition will be in a much stronger position in the Church going forward. In France, it's estimated more than 50% of Priests may be from Traditional Orders in about 20 years from now. Though many challenges remain, things look good for the future of the Church. Prayer and Sacrifice will bring us to Victory. May God grant us many Good Holy Bishops and Priests, and may our Shepherds and Apostles soon collectively re-discover all the Treasures of Tradition.