CathInfo.com

And the form of the new rite of episcopal consecration does indeed signify what it effects - that is, it signifies that the person is being consecrated as a bishop - and effects what it signifies. If it didn't, the rite of episcopal consecration that two ancient courses (The Tradition of the Apostles, AD 215, and The Apostolic Constitutions, AD 370) confirm as being used by the Apostles themselves, would have been invalid.

And here is the essence of the your error. The problem is not that the New Rite is invalid for its purpose. No, it is valid for its limited purpose. That purpose is elevating a person already ordained a priest and already consecrated a bishop to a higher office of Archbishop/Metropolitan/Patriarch. I am not saying that "the form" is invalid for that specific purpose. 

But "the form" of that Rite is definitely not valid for conferring the graces specified in the Traditional Catholic Rite of Episcopal Consecration. Those graces are not related to "governing" they are related to consecrating people and things and generating new priests as Aaron generated his priestly sons.

  The form of the new rite does not speak of Abraham as a model for the one being consecrated.  All it says is that from the beginning God chose the descendants of Abraham (as the original chosen people) and made some of them rulers and priests.  It doesn't say the person is being consecrated to be like Abraham - to have descendants, some of whom will be rulers and priests. It says he is chosen and is being consecrated to be a ruler of the Church, which is what the office of bishop essentially is.  Here is the entire form in context.

As the context shows, the person is not being consecrated to be like Abraham. He is being consecrated "to govern the Church like the Apostles," and to receive "the office of bishop."

The only thing required for the form to be valid is that is signifies the grace being conferred, which is that of the bishopric.  The form of the NREC does that perfectly. 

If you look at the Maronite formulation (third column), you will see that Abraham himself is the model:

10

qui praedestinasti ex principio genus iustorum ab Abraham, Thou hast chosen the descendants of Abraham to be Thy holy people from the beginning,

praedestinans ex principio genus iustorum ab Abraham, choosing the descendants of Abraham to be Thy holy people from the beginning,

qui elegisti Abraham, qui placuit tibi in fide... Who chosest Abraham, who pleased Thee with his faith.

He is the model and his name is used (while no other Biblical figure's name is used) precisely because Abraham is the Arch-Patriarch of the Bible. And "the form" of this Rite relates to the elevation of a Patriarch to the patriarchal see in an Eastern Rite.


The other formulations (first and second columns above) I know you are obsessed with Hippolytus, but we have no way of knowing if the text is accurate. Do you know the history of that text? Did you know that the "critical text" that you are reading from was actually produced from fragments? Do you know who one of the most famous scholars who arrange the "fragments" of the modern text is? Have you heard of Dom Botte?

Please read this:

https://www.ccwatershed.org/2014/08/17/hippolytus-rome-eucharistic-prayer-ii/

The same guy who proposed Eucharistic Prayer II for the Novus Ordo is your source for your version of the Apostolic Constitutions of Hippolytus.

A "patriarch" is the "father" of all peoples. The father is the ruler of his household. That is the metaphor being used in the New Rite "form." Ruling and governing is the new grace being conferred.

The graces in the Old Rite of Episcopal Consecration are graces of "consecrating" people and things using consecratory OILS. And the metaphor used in that Rite is of Aaron and the words allude to Psalm 133:

"like precious oil poured on the head, running down on the beard, running down on Aaron's beard, down upon the collar of his robes."

The graces are: GOVERNANCE (New Rite) vs CONSECRATION (Old Rite). Not the same graces. So the New Rite cannot be a valid replacement for the Old Rite. Even if, the New Rite is "valid" for the purpose of elevating a bishop to a higher office, which I think it is.