I don't think I said anything about validity or licitity (is that even a word?). Mary said:
The primary one is that it makes absolutely no sense for one Church to try to pass judgment on another Church in terms of whether or not their practices conform to their canons. It cannot be done.
I just happened to bring up the Anglicans, who had their church judged by yours.
The question of validity of sacraments is something quite different. I qualified my statement to refer ONLY to what is licit or not. The very idea of licit or not and the distinction between licit and valid is an internal matter, whereas the validity of a sacrament is a matter of the universal recognition of Apostolic Succession that is not dependent upon internal matters of canon law.
That distinction always confuses 'us'.
It is simply a way of explaining why we do not need to be Donatists, and explaining that the power of the sacraments comes from the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit...and the authority to minister the sacraments is a divine gift given to the Church which governs on earth by established laws or canons.
That which is licit refers directly to the laws of governance, while validity points to the divine source of the authority and power of the sacraments. The ultimate source for both is divine but the institution of the laws themselves is earthly.
If that is confusing...ahwell...