This WJ Morgan article could be of interest:

https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?pretty;board=9;topic=19235.0

Thank you for drawing our attention to this article, AJNC.
.
My reaction to Pope Pius' Sacramentum Ordinis has been similar to Alligator's.
.
Alligator, did you read the WJ Morgan? He takes Sacramentum Ordinis into account and comes up with the conclusion that is "not really the crucial issue".
.
None of us wants to have to swallow our words or go and eat dirt or worms.
.

It appears that the posters here on this thread who believe that the Novus Ordo ordinations are valid, are caught between two stools, their fickle belief being based emotions rather than truly studying the matter. I say this because someone posts an article and they go from invalid to valid. What is the article is inaccurate?  It looks to me like they are seeking teachers according to their own desires.

I said the Novus Ordo ordinations are at best doubtful. The only possible answer to that observation is that you believe with certainty of faith that the new ordinations AND the New consecration of bishops (you can't ordain if you are not a valid bishop) formula are both valid with certainty of faith.

This is THE MOST serious subject of all of Catholicism, for you may be going to a person that who not a priest. If one is not willing to study the problem, then they do not study anything, their ideas are based on whatever they WANT to believe.

I thought I had at least that much of traditional Catholicism figured out.  A "solved problem" as mathematicians and engineers might say.  Then I began reading this thread and--much more authoritatively--the appealingly short Apostolic Constitution  "Sacramentum Ordinis" by Pope Pius XII[‡], in which I read:

Pius XII specifically identified the words about accepting the Holy Ghost/Spirit and forgiving sins as not required.  And the words about offering Mass for the living and the dead are also not required.  Which purportedly reduced the risk for Pope Paul VI to drop them entirely.

That would seem to be the logical consequence if "Sacramentum Ordinis" is the crucial issue that overwhelms all other objections to validity.

If so, it seems that I would be obliged to withdraw my rejection of the validity of Novus Ordo "ordinations/installations".  I find this consequence deeply troubling, not least of which because doing so might mean that I would be obligated to acknowledge "Francis" as a valid pope.

So I suppose I'll need to resume my research in the relevant traditional Catholic literature.  Perhaps "Sacramentum Ordinis" is not really the crucial issue?

-------
Note ‡: Pope Pius XII: "Sacramentum Ordinis".  Apostolic Constitution.  <http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12SACRAO.HTM>.  Parenthesized translation to English of the italicized Latin "form" is not the work of AlligatorDicax, but presumably of 1 of the compilers or editors of <http://www.papalencyclicals.net/>.

Here's translation of the form from 1968 rite that is a similar translation to the quoted translation above from Sacramentum Ordinis:


"Almighty Father, grant to these servants of yours the dignity of the priesthood. Renew within them the Spirit of holiness. As co-workers with the order of bishops may they be faithful to the ministry that they receive from you, Lord God,  and be to others a model of right conduct."


Michael Davies in his book "The Order of Melchisidech" has the following translation for 1968 :


"Grant, we beseech Thee, Almighty Father, to these Thy servants, the dignity of the priesthood; renew within them the spirit of holiness. May they hold from Thee, the office of the second rank in Thy service and by the example of their behavior afford a pattern of holy living."

The new 1968 rite is very similar, almost word for word. What Sacramentum Ordinis said was necessary for validity can be found in the new form of 1968. The candidate receives the priesthood with the words "dignity of the priesthood" and depending on the translation either "As co-workers with the order of bishops " or "the office of the second rank." These words signify the sacramental effect, and the Church understands this to mean that the sacrament of Holy Orders has been conferred. There is no other meaning for the Church. The form with the matter means we have a priest and valid sacrament.  

Asbury and Arvinger and all who believe the New Rite of ordination and the new formula for the consecration of bishops actually do make priest and bishops,

Answer this - Do you with certainty of faith believe that the Novus Ordo ordinations are valid? 

OK, let's accept for the moment that the form and matter of the New Rite of Ordination are valid.

What about the intent? Do today's bishops ordain priests with the same intent as traditional ones do and did? Probably some of them do, but what about the modernists/progressives/rebels? Is the fact that they go through with the ordination ceremony proof positive that they intend to do what the Church intends? How would the faithful know?

I realize this question has been beaten to death regarding the ordination to the priesthood of Abp. Lefebvre by Lienart, but is there really a definitive answer?

I am not convinced by the sedevacantist argument regarding alleged invalidity of the New Rite of Ordination. The main argument is that every part mentioning the sacrificial character of the Catholic priesthood has been removed, just as in invalid Anglican rite, and therefore the sacrificial power of the priesthood is not explicitly mentioned. However, the sacrificial character of the priesthood is explicitly mentioned in the New Rite:

"The Father anointed our Lord Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. May Jesus preserve you to sanctify the Christian people and to offer sacrifice to God."

How is that not explicit mentioning of the sacrificial power of the priesthood? Dimonds tried to address it by making an argument that Anglicans mentioned "priesthood" and "sacrifice to God" as well, even though they do not believe in sacrificial power of the priesthood, but that proves nothing - what matters is how the Church understands these words, and she understands them as reference to the sacrificial power of the Catholic priesthood.

Not only does the new rite contain a sacrificial priesthood, but a priesthood that baptizes, preaches, and blesses according to the office. From the New rite:

"These men, your relatives and friends, are now to be raised to the order of priests. Consider carefully the ministry to which they are promoted.

It is true that God has made his entire people a royal priesthood in Christ. But our High Priest, Jesus Christ, also chose some of his followers to carry out publicly in the Church the priestly ministry in his name on behalf of mankind. He was sent by the Father, and he in turn sent the apostles into the world; through them and their successor, the bishops, he continues his work as Teacher, Priest, and Shepherd. Priests are co-workers of the order of bishops. They are joined to the bishops in the priestly office and are called to serve God's people.

Our brothers have seriously considered this step and are now to be ordained to the priesthood in the presbyteral order. He is to serve Christ the Teacher, Priest, and Shepherd in his ministry which is to make his own body, the Church, grow into the people of God, a holy temple.

They are called to share in the priesthood of the bishops and to be molded into the likeness of Christ, the supreme and eternal Priest. By consecration they will be made true priests of the New Testament, to preach the Gospel, sustain God's people, and celebrate the liturgy, above all, the Lord's sacrifice."

"...My sons, you are now to be advanced to the order of the presbyterate. You must apply your energies to the duty of teaching in the name of Christ, the chief Teacher. Share with all mankind the word of God you have received with joy. Meditate on the law of God, believe what you read, teach what you believe, and put into practice what you teach.

Let the doctrine you teach be true nourishment for the people of God. Let the example of your life attract the follower of Christ, so that by word and action you may build up the house which is God's Church.

In the same way you must carry out your mission of sanctifying in the power of Christ. Your ministry will perfect the spiritual sacrifice of the faithful by uniting it to Christ's sacrifice, the sacrifice which is offered sacramentally through your hands. Know what you are doing and imitate the mystery you celebrate. In the memorial of the Lord's death and resurrection, make every effort to die to sin and to walk in the new life of Christ."  

When you baptize, you will bring men and women into the people of God. In the sacrament of penance, you will forgive sins in the name of Christ and the Church. With holy oil you will relieve and console the sick. You will celebrate the liturgy, and offer thanks and praise to God throughout the day, praying not only for the people of God but for the whole world. Remember that you are chosen from among God's people and appointed to act for them in relation to God. Do your part in the work Christ the Priest with genuine joy and love, and attend to the concerns of Christ before your own.

Finally, conscious of sharing in the work of Christ, the Head and Shepherd of the Church, and united with the bishop and subject to him, seek to bring the faithful together into a unified family and to lead them effectively, through Christ and in the Holy Spirit, to God the Father. Always remember the example of the good Shepherd who came not to be served but to serve, and to seek out and rescue those who were lost. .."

Is this a case of God writing straight with crooked lines? Now it seems that we have a true priesthood to celebrate a false mass. And then via " Lex orandi, lex credendi" we have this false mass reflecting the belief of a true religion?.

Quote from: Last Tradhican on Yesterday at 06:05:52 PM

Quote

Asbury and Arvinger and all who believe the New Rite of ordination and the new formula for the consecration of bishops actually do make priest and bishops,

Answer this - Do you with certainty of faith believe that the Novus Ordo ordinations are valid?

Yes, with certainty of faith I believe they are valid. Not the slightest doubt in my mind. As certain as my faith in the sacraments, the priesthood, the Church, and God. The validity of matter and form of the 1968 rite has been proven

Good for you, I truly wish I could have the same certainty, but I don't, and all the evidence in favor of the validity I have read from Michael Davies (and the SSPX) does not convince me because they are full of big holes and all ignore the same holes, like ignoring the elephant in the room. It looks to me like they do not  want to make any waves, they do not want to upset the Vatican 1 church hierarchy. 

1) They only treat of the New Rite ordination in Latin, while no one is ordained in Latin. And they barely give the nod in favor of the New Rite by the slimmest of margins.
2) They assume the ordaining bishop followed the Latin formula
3)  Their foundation of belief is based on the promulgation of the New Rite by Paul VI, while I have serious doubts that Paul VI was a valid pope. BY his deeds, he was a destroyer of the Faith, just like JPII, B-16, and F1.

Add to the above the same 1,2,3 for the new formula for the consecration of bishops and I have even further doubts.  

All the above leads me to seek only priests ordained in the Traditional Rite that were ordained by Bishops consecrated with the Traditional formula, this is THE ONLY reason I go to the SSPX ordained priests and avoid the Fraternity and Novus Ordo priests. God so far has provided my family with these priests since the day I learned of the New Rite ordinations.

I've read Michael Davies  The Order of Melchisedech, like three times. The SSPX uses that book as a source in proving the validity of the new rite of ordination. However, if one reads it, they will find that Davies barely gives his approval by the slimmest margin and states that his study is based strictly on the original Latin version of the rite and not for all the translations. Moreover, he states that  his final approval is based on the fact that it was promulgated by a pope. Now, that is pretty slim "proof" for the SSPX or anyone to use, considering that practically no priests today are ordained in Latin, and the Novus Ordo bishops have a tendency to improvise. More importantly, what if Paul VI was not a valid pope? Davies does not touch that.