Thousands of Invalid Roman Catholic Baptisms Performed = Invalid Sacraments, Invalid Marriages?

I had to ask my Anglican priest what he thought about this story.

From Fox News,

A priest has resigned from a Catholic church in Phoenix, Arizona, after it was determined he incorrectly performed thousands of baptisms for decades by changing one word. 

Father Andres Arango resigned from St. Gregory Catholic Church in Phoenix after it was determined he used the words "We baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," instead of the correct phrase "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," according to Thomas J. Olmsted, the bishop of the Diocese of Phoenix.

"The issue with using ‘We’ is that it is not the community that baptizes a person, rather, it is Christ, and Him alone, who presides at all of the sacraments, and so it is Christ Jesus who baptizes," Olmsted said.

Following the mishap by Arango, the diocese created a FAQ page designed to answer questions people may have about specific rules. 

On that page, the diocese stated that if a baptism is invalid, and you've received other sacraments, you may need to repeat some or all of them once your baptism is eventually valid.

Answering a question on the FAQ page if an invalid baptism would impact those married by the church, the diocese stated: "Maybe! Unfortunately, there is no single clear answer."

My questions to my priest were these, "Is the RC Church being too legalistic? What if Fr. Arango was using the royal "We"?

He was not familiar with the story but immediately backed up the Bishop. He could not find an example of "we" baptizing in the Bible, and then made the apostolic succession argument that a priest in succession can do baptisms unless it is an emergency to which I answered that even I, a lowly pewsitter, who had hands laid upon me by a bishop in apostolic succession when I was confirmed can perform a baptism.

The Diocese of Phoenix answered my legalism question this way, 

"It may seem legalistic, but the words that are spoken (the sacramental form), along with the actions that are performed and the materials used (the sacramental matter) are a crucial aspect of every sacrament. If you change the words, actions, or materials required in any of the sacraments, they are not valid. For example, if a priest uses milk instead of wine during the Consecration of the Eucharist, the sacrament is not valid. The milk would not become the Blood of Jesus Christ."

Clearly, Fr. Arango broke the rules by rewriting the liturgy, and that does make the baptisms invalid as far as the Roman Catholic Church goes, but what if those whom he baptized transfer to an Anglican church? Would "we" accept those baptisms as valid?

And what about those marriages?