The new rite of episcopal consecration and the new rite of ordination are not the same kettle of fish. While the new rite of episcopal consecration is legitimately doubtful due to the massive sweeping changes in form, compare that to the relevant words for the Traditional and New Rites of Ordination, tell me if you spot the difference
"Grant we beseech Thee, Almighty Father to these thy servants, the dignity of the Priesthood: renew within them the spirit of holiness so that they may hold from Thee, O God, the office of the second rank in Thy service and by the example of their behavior afford a pattern of holy living."
“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, O God, the office of the second rank in Thy service and by the example of their behavior afford a pattern of holy living.”
While immoral, there is no substantial difference between the Form, and if said by a valid Bishop which in Fr. Hesse's case is true, the ordination is valid (but illicit)
The clear intent of the freemasonic revolutionary prelates was to either do away with completely or alter drastically the forms of the sacraments and orders. Take this pamphlet which I have, printed in 1972. It was actually sent to the priests,
Ministeria Quaedam. The front of the Motu proprio says "laying down norms." First tonsure was done away with; the minor orders are now called "ministries."
The Council of Florence (Denz. 701) gave the Latin formula for the ordination of a priest:
Accipe postestatem offerendi sacrificium in ecclesia pro vivis et mortuis, in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, "Receive the power of offering sacrifice in the church for the living and the dead, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." The longer form is in the Roman Ritual.
Topic: Fr Hesse on the Mass of Pius V vs 1962 (Read 2258 times)