CathInfo.com

This is absolutely wrong. Pope Pius XII declared that the matter is the imposition of hands. Period. :


“In the Ordination to the Priesthood, the matter is the first imposition of hands of the Bishop which is done in silence, but not the continuation of the same imposition through the extension of the right hand, nor the last imposition to which are attached the words: “Accipe Spiritus Sanctum: quorum remiseris peccata, etc.” And the form consists of the words of the “Preface,” of which the following are essential and therefore required for validity:

“Da, quaesumus, omnipotens Pater, in hunc famulum tuum Presbyterii dignitatem; innova in visceribus eius spiritum sanctitatis, ut acceptum a Te, Deus, secundi meriti munus obtineat censuramque morum exemplo suae conversationis insinuet.””

You are failing to make a distinction. I agree that the "matter" for the imprinting of the indelible character is, as you say, "the imposition of hands." But the consecration of the hands of the ordinand is a separate step in the Rite that has a special purpose.

As I said, Aquinas makes the distinction between the three steps, (1) the blessing, (2) the imposition of the hands and (3) the consecration by anointing with Chrism oil. These three things had always been required in the full Rite of Ordination.

Pius XII simply said that the Sacrament of Order (the indelible character) is imprinted using the matter and form that he referenced. At the same time, he stated that the rest of the Rite was absolutely necessary and must not be left out.

However, St. Thomas and Pius XII disagreed concerning the exact point that the indelible character was imprinted. Pius XII settled the centuries old controversy on that issue. But the consecration by anointing with Chrism is still necessary to make efficacious the fullness of the sacerdotal priesthood. St. Thomas explains what that step does, again here:

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.IIISup.Q37.A5

Pius XII does not even discuss that step because that was not the subject of Sacramentum Ordinis. But he makes clear that the full Rite must be done exactly as it always had been, presumably for the reasons stated by St. Thomas.

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12sacrao.htm

"Finally, what We have above declared and provided is by no means to be understood in the sense that it be permitted even in the slightest detail to neglect or omit the other rites which are prescribed in the Roman Pontifical; on the contrary We order that all the prescriptions laid down in the said Roman Pontifical be religiously observed and performed.

The provisions of this Our Constitution have not retroactive force; in case any doubt arises, it is be submitted to this Apostolic See.
These things We proclaim, declare, and decree, all things to the contrary notwithstanding, even those worthy of special mention, and accordingly We will and order that in the Roman Pontifical they be clearly indicated. Let no man therefore infringe this Constitution which We have enacted, nor dare to contravene the same."

You are failing to make a distinction. I agree that the "matter" for the imprinting of the indelible character is, as you say, "the imposition of hands." But the consecration of the hands of the ordinand is a separate step in the Rite that has a special purpose.

As I said, Aquinas makes the distinction between the three steps, (1) the blessing, (2) the imposition of the hands and (3) the consecration by anointing with Chrism oil. These three things had always been required in the full Rite of Ordination.

Pius XII simply said that the Sacrament of Order (the indelible character) is imprinted using the matter and form that he referenced. At the same time, he stated that the rest of the Rite was absolutely necessary and must not be left out.

However, St. Thomas and Pius XII disagreed concerning the exact point that the indelible character was imprinted. Pius XII settled the centuries old controversy on that issue. But the consecration by anointing with Chrism is still necessary to make efficacious the fullness of the sacerdotal priesthood. St. Thomas explains what that step does, again here:

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.IIISup.Q37.A5

Pius XII does not even discuss that step because that was not the subject of Sacramentum Ordinis. But he makes clear that the full Rite must be done exactly as it always had been, presumably for the reasons stated by St. Thomas.

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12sacrao.htm

"Finally, what We have above declared and provided is by no means to be understood in the sense that it be permitted even in the slightest detail to neglect or omit the other rites which are prescribed in the Roman Pontifical; on the contrary We order that all the prescriptions laid down in the said Roman Pontifical be religiously observed and performed.

The provisions of this Our Constitution have not retroactive force; in case any doubt arises, it is be submitted to this Apostolic See.
These things We proclaim, declare, and decree, all things to the contrary notwithstanding, even those worthy of special mention, and accordingly We will and order that in the Roman Pontifical they be clearly indicated. Let no man therefore infringe this Constitution which We have enacted, nor dare to contravene the same."

He did not say that the rest of the rite is absolutely necessary. I think you are confusing validity with licitness.