While reading the June 30, 1988 consecration sermon by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, I found a paragraph which I would appreciate if CathInfo members can elaborate upon it.

https://sspx.org/en/1988-episcopal-consecrations-sermon-of-archbishop-lefebvre

"You well know, my dear brethren, that there can be no priests without bishops. When God calls me—this will certainly not be long—from whom would these seminarians receive the sacrament of [holy] orders? From conciliar bishops, who, due to their doubtful intentions, confer doubtful sacraments? This is not possible. Who are the bishops who have truly kept Tradition and the sacraments such as the Church has conferred them for 20 centuries until Vatican II? They are Bishop de Castro Mayer and myself. I cannot change that. That is how it is. Hence, many seminarians have entrusted themselves to us, they sensed that here was the continuity of the Church, the continuity of Tradition. And they came to our seminaries, despite all the difficulties that they have encountered, in order to receive a true ordination to the priesthood, to say the true Sacrifice of Calvary, the true Sacrifice of the Mass, and to give you the true Sacraments, true doctrine, the true catechism. This is the goal of these seminaries."

In this consecration sermon, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre mentions that there are only two bishops who have truly kept Tradition and the Sacraments (Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer). When Archbishop Lefebvre speaks about Conciliar Bishops, does he refer to all Bishops who were at the Vatican II Council and stayed with Rome, and/or those consecrated after Vatican II council?

For example, like Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Cardinal Ottaviani and Archbishop Fulton Sheen were also Vatican II Council Fathers. Since Cardinal Ottaviani and Archbishop Fulton Sheen stayed with conciliar Rome, would Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre say that Archbishop Fulton Sheen and Cardinal Ottaviani were conciliar bishops who had doubtful intentions and conferred doubtful sacraments?

During this time period, there were other conciliar Bishops like Archbishop Ngô Đình Thục and Bishop Alfredo Méndez-Gonzalez who were sympathetic to Tradition, but stayed with conciliar Rome. Sedevacantist Bishops like Mark Pivarunas, Daniel Dolan, Clarence Kelly etc. come from this episcopal lineage. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre does not mention conciliar Bishops like Archbishop Ngô Đình Thục and Bishop Alfredo Méndez-Gonzalez in his consecration sermon. Does that mean that other Bishops such as Archbishop Ngô Đình Thục and Bishop Alfredo Méndez-Gonzalez had doubtful intentions and conferred doubtful sacraments? What does that mean for the SSPX, and other Traditional Groups (Sedevacantists, Resistance, etc.)?

While reading the June 30, 1988 consecration sermon by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, I found a paragraph which I would appreciate if CathInfo members can elaborate upon it.

https://sspx.org/en/1988-episcopal-consecrations-sermon-of-archbishop-lefebvre

In this consecration sermon, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre mentions that there are only two bishops who have truly kept Tradition and the Sacraments (Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer). When Archbishop Lefebvre speaks about Conciliar Bishops, does he refer to all Bishops who were at the Vatican II Council and stayed with Rome, and/or those consecrated after Vatican II council?

For example, like Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Cardinal Ottaviani and Archbishop Fulton Sheen were also Vatican II Council Fathers. Since Cardinal Ottaviani and Archbishop Fulton Sheen stayed with conciliar Rome, would Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre say that Archbishop Fulton Sheen and Cardinal Ottaviani were conciliar bishops who had doubtful intentions and conferred doubtful sacraments?

During this time period, there were other conciliar Bishops like Archbishop Ngô Đình Thục and Bishop Alfredo Méndez-Gonzalez who were sympathetic to Tradition, but stayed with conciliar Rome. Sedevacantist Bishops like Mark Pivarunas, Daniel Dolan, Clarence Kelly etc. come from this episcopal lineage. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre does not mention conciliar Bishops like Archbishop Ngô Đình Thục and Bishop Alfredo Méndez-Gonzalez in his consecration sermon. Does that mean that other Bishops such as Archbishop Ngô Đình Thục and Bishop Alfredo Méndez-Gonzalez had doubtful intentions and conferred doubtful sacraments? What does that mean for the SSPX, and other Traditional Groups (Sedevacantists, Resistance, etc.)?

Bishop Sheen was a flaming liberal by the late 1960's watch his episodes on Firing Line
Card Ottaviani was definitely a catholic but he too capitulated by inaction and misguided obedience.  

Cardinal Ottaviani, a Catholic
Archbishop Sheen, a liberal
and Archbishop Thuc, a bizarre character
were all dead when Archbishop Lefebvre gave this sermon. May they rest in peace. He was not speaking of them.
Archbishop Mendez embraced the NO but was traditionallly minded.
Bishop Lazo after he returned to tradition would have given certainly valid ordinations, it is unlikely that he did.
The ordinations of the latter two would be doubtful.
Archbishop Lefebvre is exactly correct. Today the only option is to get ordination from one of the bishops he consecrated OR to get doubtful ordination.