What is wrong with this picture?

From an article under the heading, Priests Defy Vatican on Women's Ordination, NY Times, 7/22/11:

"More than 150 Roman Catholic priests in the United States have signed a statement in support of a fellow cleric who faces dismissal for participating in a ceremony that purported to ordain a woman as a priest, in defiance of church teaching."

The sentence I quoted is the first sentence in the article, the so-called key sentence in journalism.

The sentence tells us that 150 priests are, in effect, defying the Vatican (church teaching, they call it) by supporting someone who participated in a sacrament.  Except the Times didn't phrase it that way.

One has to wonder:  Does the Times now endorse church teaching?  For they call the ceremony one that purported to ordain.

Now what is that all about?

Do they regularly question the validity of other sacraments?   Or other ordinations?  (Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc.)   Do they report that some religions or religious groups consecrate but others just purport to do so?  (I think not!)

If a lay person blesses patients in a hospital (Yes, I did!), would they report it was just a purported blessing?

Am I making something out of nothing here?   
 
Or is the Times making nothing out of something?