CathInfo.com

 
No, the “red line” will never be crossed. Because these sspx trads can always claim, like one forum member has already, that sspx priests are “100% valid.” (Whether that’s true or not, is a question, perhaps, for extended debate. But I won’t get into it here, or probably anywhere else.
Hey, if a Muslim iman was elected pope, and Shinto priests were ordained by the church, it wouldn’t matter. These hardcore sspxers have their “valid” sacraments, don’t they? They have their “valid” priests, don’t they? It will all work out just peachy for them in the short run. The other shoe will never drop for them, and that is just what Fellay & Co. are banking upon.  They are past masters at boiling a frog slowly.

Hollingsworth...regarding that imam pope
..do you really think those in the Resistance would respond diffetently?  They would still say he was a true pope.

Because these sspx trads can always claim, like one forum member has already, that sspx priests are “100% valid.” (Whether that’s true or not, is a question, perhaps, for extended debate. But I won’t get into it here, or probably anywhere else.

Well you can't blame us for answering your question. The question of "should we go to valid Masses of the SSPX, despite everything else" is a completely separate issue.

And no, it most certainly is NOT open for debate! Archbishop Lefebvre was a valid bishop. He consecrated 4 men bishops in 1988. Those 4 men have ordained hundreds of priests, 100% of whom are valid priests. The bishops consecrated by +Williamson are likewise valid bishops.

Which SSPX priest is not validly ordained, according to you? There might be a couple priests in the SSPX milieu like that MSGR in Ridgefield, CT but he's not an SSPX priest and everyone knows that! The ordination of all the SSPX priests, even the recent ones, is well docuмented with tons of witnesses, and the ordination was done by one of the (4) original SSPX bishops -- all of whom are valid bishops.

As I mentioned above, I don't attend the SSPX myself. But I also respect the truth. I'll give the devil his due. The SSPX has valid priests; that is simply a fact, so I'll freely grant them that. That doesn't mean it's safe for the Faithful to park their souls there.

You sound like you disagree with that.

I actually spoke with Fr Bouchacourt in person Feb 10 at our chapel. I asked him directly regarding the issue of new bishops, and his answer was “that is a question that is a few years away, when we need it, it will be done, even if Rome does not approve” he also told me that the new set of discussions being done in Rome has nothing to do with a deal, and no deal will be sought: it is only to go preach the faith to the Romans.

All I can say to that is: Yeah right!
They wouldn't be able to consecrate without Roman approval. They officially, on their main website, came out against the consecration of +Faure, if you recall. Once they did that, they locked themselves in morally speaking. They can't criticize the consecration of +Faure and then do the exact same thing a few years later -- talk about hypocrisy and contradiction!