After a year, as long as the Holy Oils are not rancid, the Sacraments of Extreme Unction and Confirmation would still be valid, just illicit. Also, the Exorcisms in Baptism do not depend on the Oil.

Remember these people do not have the authority of the Church to use the sacramental order as a means of coersion or punishment,

but in doing so regardless, they thwart the primary mission of the Catholic Church and its priesthood, which is to save souls and bring them to God.

Conflicting over hostile statements between the sects is one order of worldly activity, but engaging the Divinely instituted Sacraments in these public squabbles is on an entirely different and higher order of scandal.

On the Pfeiffer/Hewko side,  Fr. Pfeiffer was encouraged to rebel against Menzingen. He did so, and when his continued agitation then began to upset ongoing negotiations between the SSPX and its estranged Bishop, Fr. Pfeiffer was essentially cut off and sacrificed and any future assistance to him became doubtful.

And there appears to have been interference with other priests who became affiliated with the Pfeiffer group and supported their position on some of Bishop Williamson's views and teaching. That is apparently a grave crime in the petite SSPX.  Such great outrage at criticising the Bishop's questionable exhortations and conclusions, as if there were no grounds for any just criticism or correction.  His followers will admit no fault or doubt about his utterings, and they will tolerate none. His newly minted Bishops are identical in such attitudes. That is a fair indication of the same cultism that has been part of the SSPX for decades.

Fr. Pfeiffer should or hopefully has, found alternate sources for their sacramental necessities. Perhaps putting his anti-sedevacantism on the shelf to seek them from a valid Bishop, a sede-vacantist or an Eastern Orthodox Bishop of the old Tradition.

Internecine squabbling is one thing, but holding innocent souls hostage to these sectarian hostilities is a grave enterprise, no matter who does it.

In this, this new hierarchy is proving itself to be everybit a recreation of the SSPX, and speaking of cultic behavior, as has been imputed to the Pfeiffer group in other threads, it is clearly in evidence with these "resistance" clerics. It is a matter of "you have said bad things about our leader and therfore the souls under your care will be denied sacramental necessities by us, until you recant" Have we not heard this before from the Roi de Menzingen?

Remember these people do not have the authority of the Church to use the sacramental order as a means of coersion or punishment, but in doing so regardless, they thwart the primary mission of the Catholic Church and its priesthood, which is to save souls and bring them to God.

Conflicting over hostile statements between the sects is one order of worldly activity, but engaging the Divinely instituted Sacraments in these public squabbles is on an entirely different and higher order of scandal.

On the Pfeiffer/Hewko side,  Fr. Pfeiffer was encouraged to rebel against Menzingen. He did so, and when his continued agitation then began to upset ongoing negotiations between the SSPX and its estranged Bishop, Fr. Pfeiffer was essentially cut off and sacrificed and any future assistance to him became doubtful.

And there appears to have been interference with other priests who became affiliated with the Pfeiffer group and supported their position on some of Bishop Williamson's views and teaching. That is apparently a grave crime in the petite SSPX.  Such great outrage at criticising the Bishop's questionable exhortations and conclusions, as if there were no grounds for any just criticism or correction.  His followers will admit no fault or doubt about his utterings, and they will tolerate none. His newly minted Bishops are identical in such attitudes. That is a fair indication of the same cultism that has been part of the SSPX for decades.

Fr. Pfeiffer should or hopefully has, found alternate sources for their sacramental necessities. Perhaps putting his anti-sedevacantism on the shelf to seek them from a valid Bishop, a sede-vacantist or an Eastern Orthodox Bishop of the old Tradition.

The normal impediments to this are unimportant and should be suspended in such a time of crisis and the near complete breakdown of authority and reason in the Church today.
He should also leave SSPX I&II behind and focus on fighting against the treason in Rome and the Chanceries. Then he can claim that they are a true resistance.

The war between these two faction was unnecessary and did not need to happen. There is much fault which could be apportioned to all concerned. When the parties began to act in self interest, trouble entered in, it is the tool and the doorway by which demons have their powers over men.

I will pray for them all.

Fr. Pfeiffer should or hopefully has, found alternate sources for their sacramental necessities. Perhaps putting his anti-sedevacantism on the shelf to seek them from a valid Bishop, a sede-vacantist or an Eastern Orthodox Bishop of the old Tradition.
 

Thank you for the rare post of reason and insight seen here.
Bp. Fellay and the SSPX will drive out parishioners and withhold sacraments from those who are "with the Resistance."
Bp. Williamson and his Three withhold sacraments from those who are "with the Pfeiffer Resistance."
They are like two sides of the same coin: no criticism of either +Fellay or +Williamson is tolerated and is punished severely.

I find this approach interesting. I believe Matthew and Sean Johnson hold to the same trad-ecuмenical viewpoint you outline here.
My mother raised us that if you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.
I don’t buy it.
Pick something and stick with it.
:soapbox: