A charitable and impartial analysis. Good work.

However, I must disagree that a doubtful form of consecration could ever be used. (The fact the NREC is certainly invalid aside.)

Have you any authorities which support your view of employing doubtful forms of sacraments?

Also, what could possibly prevent someone from uttering at least the one sentence form of the old rite?

I was thinking of St. Thomas Aquinas’s maxim that necessity dispenses with the law.

So for example, although I don’t receive sacraments from conciliar clergy, if I was in a state of mortal sin, got in a car accident, was dying on the side of the road, and a conciliar priest pulled over to hear my confession, I would most certainly confess to him:

If I don’t, I will certainly be damned, but if I do, I might be saved.

The Non Possumus Blog obtained this suppressed pic of Bishop (?) Huonder consecrating (?) the holy oils, assisted by Fathers Jeindl and Schreiber (SSPX).

http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/2023/04/non-possumus-tuvo-acceso-una-de-las.html?m=1

Apparently,y it's also now on the German FSSPX site (not sure which one came first):

Is it possible to receive the anointing of the sick even in the case of simple illnesses? - District of Germany (fsspx.de)

“We must be patient.  What is important is that there no longer be rejection in their hearts.  Gradually, we must expect further steps, like concelebration.” (Fr. Cottier, on his conquest of Campos)

Or, apparently, the acceptance of conciliar ministration for critical functions and necessities of the SSPX apostolate:

When Francis sent retired Swiss Bishop Vitus Huonder to live with the SSPX at its boys school, the Society played it off as though Huonder was converting to Tradition, whereas my book “As We Are?” docuмented Huonder being sent by Francis to keep him abreast of, and further, SSPX reintegration.

It appears now that this stratagem has been so effective, and born so much conciliar fruit for Francis, that the SSPX’s German seminary schedule for Holy Week announces that +Huonder will be the one to celebrate the Holy Thursday Chrism Mass (and consequently be the one to consecrate SSPX holy oils)!

https://fsspx.today/chapel/zaitzkofen/#d-2023-04-06

Slowly, slowly, the deterioration of the SSPX progresses, as it slides into conciliarism.

Is this a Roman-Menzingen agreement to further condition the faithful (who have already accepted the ministration of Ecclesia Dei priests at African SSPX chapels) to accept conciliar episcopal consecration for their own future bishops?

Yes, it seems likely that Huonder’s consecration of holy oils is a preparation of the faithful for the acceptance of Rome-approved (or even Rome-consecrated) bishops (Note the proximity of +Williamson's revelation of rumors of imminent episcopal consecrations, with Huonder consecrating holy oils a couple weeks later).  

I suspect they wanted this news to be widely diffused, to use it as a trial balloon and gauge their "progress:"

If there are no grumblings in the ranks or pews (and there aren't), it signals to Rome that it is safe to give the SSPX bishops; no need to fear the SSPX any more; they are no threat to conciliarism.

As I said elsewhere when this news broke of the rumored consecrations, the SSPX will try to portray these consecrations as the final realization of +Lefebvre's dream of bishops to continue the SSPX (but only at the cost of making the SSPX hardly worth continuing).

Huonder/SSPX Movie Trailer

That does it:

The SSPX is getting bishops (either conciliar-approved, or conciliar-consecrated).

They’re preparing the faithful (and the clergy are complicit).

SSPX pledging good behavior to Francis:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8CBqjZX6FjE&pp=ygUjZ2V0IHlvdXIgbWluZCByaWdodCBjb29sIGhhbmQgbHVrZSA%3D

Oh my goodness....  Sadly... But yes! 

This gave me a good laugh this morning. Thank you! 

Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX have never considered the New Rite of Priestly Ordination to be invalid. It is the intention of the ordaining bishop, and the validity of his consecration, that may be called into question. If the ordination was performed by a true bishop whose intention was not in doubt, then conditionally re-ordaining would not only be not necessary but forbidden by the Church.

I agree with you. This is why it is on a case-by-case basis and never to my knowledge a strict policy of the SSPX to conditionally ordain all NO clergy that embraces Tradition. If I'm not mistaken, I read also the same controversy in Brazil with Fr. Jahir Britto of the FBMV (also not known to be conditionally ordained) and Dom Tomas Aquino defended the validity of Fr. Jahir's ordination.

Before this happened, I told the SSPX priest that celebrates mass at the mission I attend to that I wished to receive confirmation as soon as possible.

Just this week, he contacted me saying that he was going to send me the calendar of confirmation visits because it is unlikely that the bishops will visit the city I live in so I'll probably have to travel. But now I'm wondering whether they are going to use the oils "consecrated" by Huonder.

Does anybody have an idea where the oils used for confirmation in Mexico come from? Or does every bishop carry his "own" oil? I do not know yet which bishop is going to visit.

It has been said on some other thread on this board that the Huonder (Un)Holy Oils will be used only in Europe.

From what I could gather, each chapel gets its oils from the nearest seminary. So, the oils used in Mexico will probably come from the American seminary.

Why not just get confirmed by +Zendejas?