Either way, do you really think it makes sense for somebody to be consigned to a place like this based on whether a priest used all the right words in a ritual?
I believe that Rome's position here is that they have been entrusted with specific sacraments as tools / "means of grace," and it's not their place to tinker with them, but that doesn't imply that anyone is automatically consigned anywhere as a result of such tinkering. It's entirely reasonable to believe that God is extending grace in a non-standard way because God agrees that this does not make sense. But the fact remains that it is still a non-standard way and not actually the use of the sacraments as given to the Church, and the Church doesn't have the power to decide how much tinkering is too much. It just gets the sacraments the way the sacraments are.
A bad attempt at a nerdy analogy here is to a sudo rule. An unprivileged user who doesn't have "ALL" sudo access must run specific commands in the way they're phrased in the sudoers file. If the sudoers file says you can run "sudo shutdown -h now," and you type "sudo shutdown --halt now", it won't work. But that doesn't mean that the root account is unable to run "shutdown --halt now" or that root doesn't think the "--halt" version is a good idea. It certainly doesn't mean you're unable to contact whoever is root and say "Hey, please run shutdown --halt now," or that they'll ignore you if you do. If root runs it, it will work, and have the same effect. It's just not what's in the sudoers file.
But what it seems that the church also believes in the other side of the analogy: that if your command line DOES match the sudoers file, (i.e. the wording IS right), it somehow obliges God one way or the other, and that part seems difficult to believe, even if one accepts the underlying concept of baptism.
