One of my biggest concerns about the Rite of Ordination is that they ONLY removed the "ut". There was absolutely ZERO REASON to justify such a minute change. If the removal of "ut" did not change the sense/meaning of the sentence, then why do it at all?
No, this was clearly done on purpose to subtly invalidate the Rite of Ordination by the same enemy infiltrators and imposters who have brought us the rest of the Vatican II and Novus Ordo abominations.
No, the ut is very significant. One of the things that's essential for the validity of a Sacramental form is to signify the EFFECT of the Sacrament. "ut" clearly indicates that what follows is the EFFECT of what came before, i.e. that it's the effect of the Sacrament. When you remove the "ut," you're adding another imprecation but not linking it directly as an effect of the former.
Removal of the "ut" is incredibly significant and there was no other reason to do it other than with the malicious intent to invalidate the Sacrament.
You'll see what these enemies of the Church did. They first invalidated the Mass itself by vitiating the form of consecration "for you and for all". They needed to do that right away since there were many pre-V2-ordained priests still out there offering the Mass. Once most of them had died out, you'll notice that they magically reverted back to "for you and for many". By that time the priests themselves were nearly all invalid, so no more need to invalidate the Mass.
Topic: What does Bishop Williamson say about the validity of Novus Ordo orders? (Read 5162 times)