Matter form and intention or not, It begs the question, are the men
of the new order incapable of
of making judgments on these things?  Does persistent error cloud judgment?  And using Fr. Hesse's reasoning, who would seek unity with a schismatic sect?

Absolutely Gunter. As Archbishop Lefebvre said, we have a strict duty to separate ourselves from this danger to the Faith.

I believe the parallel Fr. Hesse sets up is similar to the Anglican schismatics.  So with the passage of time and their persistent in the brake with Tradition, doing what the Church intends to do comes into question. Therfore it is prudent to correct any deficiencies.

The analogy is true, only in regards to intent.  It is deficient in comparing actions.  Fr Hesse does not go far enough in describing V2's revolution.

Yes, both the Anglicans and V2 Modernists intended to break from the Church.  The Anglicans did not change their rites overnight, but it was a slow, gradual change.  On the contrary, the V2 modernists changed the rites from the start.  The Anglican's actions to become invalid took longer than their schismatic intent.  The V2 invalidity happened almost simultaneously with their intent.

"Doing what the Church intends to do" is essentially part of the True Rites of sacraments.  Which is why even a heretic/Anglican priest conferred valid sacraments; because if one uses True Rites, the "Church's intention" is part of these prayers.

When the V2 modernists introduced new rites, they were breaking with the Church immediately.  They did NOT intend to do "what the Church intends" from the get-go.  And their new rites do not have the Church's intention inherent in them, nor the Holy Ghost's protection from error.  This is a major acceleration of heresy/schism, as compared to the Anglicans.

PV, the setting of “character” of the Holy Order can be validly accomplished, but the “powers” specific to each different Holy Order are applied/unlocked later in the ceremony.

If the words specifying the essential characteristics of the “power” changes, then the ordinand has different powers from those of a traditionally-ordained Catholic Priest. This person is, at best, a new kind of “priest” with defective “powers.” He cannot do those things which he has not been given the “power” to do.

See Aquinas’s discussion on the difference between “grace,” “character,” and “powers,” in the Summa Theologiae.

What are the wording changes that convey the new powers as opposed to traditional powers.

Plenus Venter:  did you ever read the True Story of the vatican Council, by Cardinal Manning.  The Infallibility dogma was brought forward for all the 300 years of misinterpretations and the years of Luther.  It was a mess. It was thought, Holy Ghost will protect pope/church.  But the word "might" was used in the 1hour and a half of reading/defining at Vatican I.  Might the pope take his divine office, might he ask for the Holy Ghost, might he.  For if he decides not to, he can lose his authority.  Example: Did Pope Pius XI consecrate Russia, as God commanded through Our Lady in 1929.  No, he did not. Hm?  That is serious. Did he lose his authority?

It is noted: That Our Lady told Lucia at TUY, Spain, 1929, that the hour was now, to do the consecration.  Then it is said, that Our Lady said, Pope Pius XI did not consecrate, half measure.  He will be like King Louis who was asked to consecrate France. He did not, he lost his throne and was beheaded.

Pope can lose authority, and did the church lose her head. yes, she did.

Plenus Venter:  did you ever read the True Story of the vatican Council, by Cardinal Manning.  The Infallibility dogma was brought forward for all the 300 years of misinterpretations and the years of Luther.  It was a mess. It was thought, Holy Ghost will protect pope/church.  But the word "might" was used in the 1hour and a half of reading/defining at Vatican I.  Might the pope take his divine office, might he ask for the Holy Ghost, might he.  For if he decides not to, he can lose his authority.  Example: Did Pope Pius XI consecrate Russia, as God commanded through Our Lady in 1929.  No, he did not. Hm?  That is serious. Did he lose his authority?

It is noted: That Our Lady told Lucia at TUY, Spain, 1929, that the hour was now, to do the consecration.  Then it is said, that Our Lady said, Pope Pius XI did not consecrate, half measure.  He will be like King Louis who was asked to consecrate France. He did not, he lost his throne and was beheaded.

Pope can lose authority, and did the church lose her head. yes, she did.

Hey songbird. I've read a bit on the Vatican Council, but you know, I don't think I've read Cardinal Manning. I was always meaning to and I will track that down now, thank you for reminding me!... so much to read! Have you read Bishop Vincent Gasser's Relatio to the Council on Infallibility? I highly recommend it.

As for the Pope losing his authority... we are in uncharted territory, at least when it comes to infallible teaching. We won't derail another thread! But I believe we should stick to what is certain: resist the erring Pope and separate ourselves from dangers to the faith. Hold fast to Tradition! Almighty God gave us a guide, Archbishop Lefebvre, and what a guide he gave us!

I am wondering if anyone knows if there have been any revisions to the new rite of ordinations/consecrations, or do they continue to use the same NO rite of PPVI of 1968?

The typical edition of the Paul VI ordinale remains the same. The ICEL translation has gone through two versions. The second version brought the form for presbyteral ordination closer to the Latin of the typical edition.

My opinion on the Novus Ordo rites of ordination for Latin typical edition:

• Rite of diaconal ordination - possibly valid
• Rite of presbyteral ordination - possibly valid
• Rite of episcopal consecration - doubtfully valid (leaning towards invalid)

The typical edition of the Paul VI ordinale remains the same. The ICEL translation has gone through two versions. The second version brought the form for presbyteral ordination closer to the Latin of the typical edition.

My opinion on the Novus Ordo rites of ordination for Latin typical edition:

• Rite of diaconal ordination - possibly valid
• Rite of presbyteral ordination - possibly valid
• Rite of episcopal consecration - doubtfully valid (leaning towards invalid)

Thanks Elwin!