Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Traditional Powers of the Priesthood absent in novus ordo ordinations  (Read 10374 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Was it a change in position?
According to Father Cekada in the link posted above, when he asked Archbishop Lefebrve in the 70's, he considered the NREC to be invalid.

So yes, change in position for the SSPX. 

http://www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/NewEpConsArtPDF2.pdf

Did you ask me because you think it isn't a change in position?

What's the difference?

I've read that they did only the essential form.

Did the Archbishop do the whole ordination ceremony?
Correct, essential vs whole ceremony.
As fas as I recall ABL did the whole ceremony.


According to Father Cekada in the link posted above, when he asked Archbishop Lefebrve in the 70's, he considered the NREC to be invalid.

So yes, change in position for the SSPX. 

http://www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/NewEpConsArtPDF2.pdf

Did you ask me because you think it isn't a change in position?
Well, I don't put much weight in Fr. Cekada, God rest his soul.  My one and only experience with him was not good.  +Dolan apologized to me for Fr. Cekada's behavior.

I think people underestimate the importance of the "powers of the priesthood" part of Ordinations.  Archbishop Lefebvre said that he believed the new rite was defective specifically because they left these parts out.  It is similar to what the Anglicans did and how Leo XIII in his Aposolicae Curae said that it didn't matter if the Anglicans got the "preface prayer" correct because there was no mention of the offering of Masks and sacrifices which is essential to the priesthood.

There is actually a canon in the Council of Trent and the Catechism later expounding on this that says that the power to offer Masses and hear confessions is given through these two prayers.  Before Vatican II, if either of these parts were omitted a priest had to be conditionally ordained.

I will attach the three most crucial points.


Archbishop Lefebvre's Letter to Confused Catholics:

(Archbishop Lefebvre himself said this about the new orders:)

"Everything is bound up together. By attacking the base of the building it is destroyed entirely. No more Mass, no more priests. The ritual, before it was altered, had the bishop say “Receive the power to offer to God the Holy Sacrifice and to celebrate Holy Mass both for the living and for the dead, in the name of the Lord.” He had previously blessed the hands of the ordinand by pronouncing these words: “So that all that they bless may be blessed and all that they consecrate may be consecrated and sanctified.” The power conferred is expressed without ambiguity: “That for the salvation of Thy people and by their holy blessing, they may effect the Transubstantiation of the bread and the wine into the Body and Blood of Thy Divine Son.” Nowadays the bishop says: “Receive the offering of the holy people to present it to God.” He makes the new priest an intermediary rather than the holder of the ministerial priesthood and the offerer of a sacrifice. The conception is wholly different." (p.54)"