This is the claim of Bishop Louis Vezelis and Bishop Giles Butler:
But, let us assume he was - does this invalidate the ordinations he made? We know for a fact that the Church recognized ordinations performed by Bishops who were Freemasons in France after the French Revolution. We KNOW that a heretic, an atheist, even a satanist can validly administer the Sacrament of Baptism - so why would a freemason not be able to validly administer Holy Orders?
Think about the fact that Freemasonry is a SECRET society - how can one KNOW if any Bishop is/was or is/was not a Freemason?
There are those who claim that the Bishop who ordained Vezelis was a Freemason - should we doubt Vezelis' ordination and subsequent Consecration and therefor all the clergy ordained by Vezelis?
How could we ever KNOW if any given Priest was validly ordained, after all, since Freemasonry is secret, the Bishop who ordained this priest or that priest could have been a freemason!
The Church has had enemies since Christ founded it, Arians, Gnostics, Protestants, etc... all of which hated the true Faith and deceived Catholic Clergy members, including Bishops - Freemasonry is no different.
The fact is - there is no evidence Lienart was a freemason - NONE, but even if he was, this in and of itself is not reason for positive doubt and hence no reason to doubt his ordinations anymore than a reason to doubt Vezelis' ordination.
This nonsense is part of the cult like power play where these men can claim ordinary jurisdiction which can only be granted by a Pope - the Supreme Pontiff.