PROBLEMS WITH THE NOVUS ORDO CONSECRATION RITE

                     TRADITIO Traditional Roman Catholic Internet Site   
 E-mail List: traditio@traditio.com, Web Page: http://www.traditio.com
    Copyright 2001 JM.  Reproduction prohibited without authorization.


An Open Letter
April 18, 2001
From John Menezes (Bombay, India)


...Paul VI completely recast the Church's sacramental rites with 
the active assistance of six Protestant ministers, men who had no 
belief in the Mass and Priesthood. Concerning the new 'mass' called the 
Novus Ordo Missae, it has been represented by the highest theological 
authorities, Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, that :

* it teems with insinuations and manifest errors against the 
Catholic religion; 
* it dismantles the defences of the Faith; the Real Presence is 
never alluded to (read with Article 7 of the General Instruction                    
to Missale Romanum) and belief in it is implicitly repudiated; 
* the celebrant is nothing more than a Protestant minister.

These and over a dozen other objections have simply been ignored.
On April 6, 1969 Paul VI decreed his revised rites of ordination. 'It 
was necessary in the revision of the rite to add, delete, or change 
certain things, either to restore texts to their earlier integrity to 
make the expressions clearer, or to describe the sacramental effects 
better' stated Paul VI in his Apostolic Constitution 'Pontificalis 
Romani Recognitio' of June 18, 1968.

Elsewhere, in the same ApostolicConstitution, Paul VI has stated: 
'...it appeared appropriate to take from ancient sources the 
consecratory prayer which is found in the documents called the 
Apostolic Traditions of Hippolytus of Rome, written at the beginning of 
the third century, and which is still used in large part in the 
ordination rites of the Coptic and West Syrian liturgies.' By the same 
Apostolic Constitution Paul VI also revised the ordination rite for 
priests 'to express', as he would have one believe, 'in sharper light 
the central part of the ordination…'

In the revised rite for priests, every mandatory mention of the 
power to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, to bless, and to hear 
and forgive sins has been excluded. There is a muted reference to these 
powers in the opening exhortation of the ordaining bishop, but an 
earlier explanatory note makes the exhortation optional.

The Form of the sacrament, confirmed by Pope Pius XII in his 
constitution ‘Sacramentum Ordinis’ (1947), has been split into two 
parts with the removal of the Latin word 'ut' (so that), delinking 
cause (the Spirit of holiness) from effect (the office of second rank), 
thereby denying that the grace of the Holy Ghost accompanies the 
sacrament.

	The new rite for bishops is much more debatable. Contrary to the 
above-mentioned assertions of Paul VI, the clear specifications of the 
episcopal power of a Catholic bishop in the traditional rite are 
excluded in the new rite. The traditional Form of the sacrament, 
confirmed by Pope Pius XII in 'Sacramentum Ordinis', has been replaced 
by another one said by Paul VI to be used in large part in the 
ordination rites of the Coptic and West Syrian liturgies. But if this 
new Form is placed side by side with the Form contained in the West 
Syrian Pontifical, one can see very clearly that not only whatever is 
indicative of episcopal grace in the West Syrian Pontifical has been 
totally excluded, but that certain essential words in Paul VI's Form 
are not to be found in the West Syrian Pontifical at all.

	Indeed, the new Form is so ambiguous that the Episcopal Church of 
the United States of America, a Protestant Church which does not 
believe either in the Real Presence or in a priesthood vested with 
supernatural power, has readily incorporated it into its 1979 Book of 
Common Prayer for its ordination rite for bishops. Thus it appears that 
the post-Conciliar Church has no intention of perpetuating the Catholic 
priesthood or episcopate, but has effectively endorsed the Reformation.

	It is worthwhile to have a closer look at the new rite and 
especially the innovations:


1. In the traditional rite, the bishop-elect reads a lengthy oath 
pledging obedience to the Apostle Peter, the Holy Roman Church, the 
Pope and his successors, and to honour the Legates of the Apostolic See 
etc.

	In the new rite the oath has been replaced with an Instruction of 
the principal consecrator which is replete with ambiguities and 
equivocations concerning the ministry of the bishop, his title, rank          
and duty. Let us consider a few examples.

          'Dearly beloved people: Consider carefully the position in 
the Church to which our brother is about to be promoted' (either all 
are priests or the ordinand is a layman like the rest).

          'So the apostles sent helpers ... and passed on to them the 
gift of the Holy Spirit ... by an imposition of hands which confers the 
sacrament of Orders in its fullness' (was the imposition of hands not 
accompanied by a charge which defined the degree of priesthood? Or did 
the Apostles make bishops right away ?).

          'The title of bishop derives not from his rank but from his 
duty, and it is the part of the bishop to serve rather than to rule' 
(whom is the bishop to serve: the errant theologian, the liturgical          
innovator, the priests' senate, or the marriage annulment tribunal?).


2. Then comes the Examination in both the rites. In the traditional 
rite the bishop elect vowed, in the new rite he merely resolves. In the 
former, he vowed obedience to the Pope. In the latter he resolves to     
remain united to the Church by his link with the order of bishops 
(being constrained to accept collegiality).

     In the traditional rite there is an explicit reference to the rank 
of Bishop. In the new rite, he resolves to carry out the highest duties 
of the priesthood. (Is the avoidance of the word episcopate a 
deliberate vitiation of the rite's intention?)

     In the traditional rite, he vowed to keep with reverence the 
traditions, decrees, and laws of the Holy See, and to render to Peter 
subjection and obedience. In the new rite he resolves merely to be 
loyal in obedience to the successor of St. Peter. (It seems to imply 
that all that is required now is loyalty to the occupant of the chair 
of Peter, i.e., to one man, even if such occupant deviates from the 
consistent teachings of the Catholic Church as the post-Conciliar popes 
have done.)


3. The traditional rite contained a detailed Profession of Faith on the 
part of the bishop elect through the interrogation of the consecrator. 
In the new rite, this Profession is replaced with a question: ‘Are you     
resolved to maintain the content of faith, entire and uncorrupted as 
handed down by the apostles and professed by the Church at all times 
and places?’ (Is the exclusion of a formal Profession of Faith a     
concession to modern ecumenism and is the substitute resolution a 
guarantee of the bishop–elect’s orthodoxy in all matters concerning the 
faith?).


4. In the traditional rite, the Consecrator proclaimed : 
   
     'A BISHOP IS CHARGED WITH THE DUTY TO JUDGE, INTERPRET, 
CONSECRATE, ORDAIN, OFFER, BAPTIZE AND CONFIRM.'

     In doing so he spelled out the powers of the bishop. In the new 
rite this specification does not exist, an omission which amounts to an 
infraction of the bishop's powers. (The excuse for reform was     
clarification of the rite !)


5. The magnificient Litany of the Saints now stands abridged. 


6. The new 'Prayer of Consecration' is in three parts. The first part, 
recited only by the principal consecrator, reads: 

     'Father..., your life-giving revelation has laid down rules for 
your Church, the just people of Abraham upon whom you had set your mark 
from the beginning: in that Church you have established a     
government and priesthood so as not to leave your sanctuary without its 
liturgy; and from the beginning of the world it has pleased you to be 
glorified by the ministers whom you have chosen'. (This establishes a 
continuity and equation with the Jewish priesthood which were 
deliberately excluded and contrasted in the traditional rite.)

     Thereafter, in the new rite, all the consecrating bishops say: 
'Now pour out upon this chosen one that power which flows from you, the 
perfect Spirit whom you gave to your beloved Son Jesus Christ, the     
Spirit whom he gave to the Apostles, who established the Church in 
every place as the sanctuary where your name would be praised and 
glorified'. (Indeed, the Holy Spirit is invoked in several of the     
Church's sacraments. In the new rite, it is bereft of fulfillment; what 
exact power of the Holy Spirit, which was given to the Apostles, is now 
sought? It is the power to confirm, to make a deacon, or to raise a 
priest? Without the specification of a Catholic bishop, without the 
Profession of Faith, without the vows to entertain reverently, teach 
and keep the traditions and authoritative enactments of the Apostolic 
See, what sort of a species is the new bishop?)

	The sufficiency of the traditional Form, confirmed by Pope Pius 
XII, in 'Sacramentum Ordinis', in the words: 'Grant Thy priest the 
plentitude of Thy ministry, i.e., the fullness of the Episcopal office, 
'and with the dew of Thy heavenly ointment sanctify him, clad with the 
ornaments of all that glorifieth', is absent in the new Form despite 
Pope Pius XII's strong warning: 'No one therefore is allowed to 
infringe upon this Constitution given by us, nor should anyone dare to 
have the audacity to contradict it……'

     In the third part of the new 'Prayer of Consecration' the 
principal consecrator continues alone to ask the Father to inspire the 
heart of His servant chosen to be a bishop (with no specification in 
the Catholic sense and no specific episcopal power; "indeed, he is seen 
as an 'overseer' rather than one having the 'fullness of the 
priesthood', to use the words in 'Apostolicae Curae' of Pope Leo XIII), 
to ask the Spirit to give him power to forgive sins (no longer given in 
the new rite of ordination of priests, yet exercised nonetheless!) and 
to invoke the power to loose every bond (which, without the 
corresponding power to bind, so explicitly stated in both the Roman and 
West Syrian Pontificals, singularly qualifies the ordinand to be a 
member of the post-Conciliar demolition squad).


7. The post-Conciliar rite, in not specifying the grace it effects, 
suffers from the same infirmity which merited the condemnation of the 
Anglican rite as null and void by Pope Leo XIII in his Bull     
'Apostolicae Curae'.

     The new rite omits the anointing of hands by which the matter of 
several sacraments is applied.  Authority is ignored in the elimination 
of 'Grant unto him O Lord the Episcopal seat to rule Thy Church and the 
flock entrusted to him. Be Thou his authority, be Thou his power, be 
Thou his firmness'.

     No longer does the handing over of the staff of authority precede 
the other instruments of office, as in the traditional rite, 
accompanied by the charge: 'that Thou may be piously severe in the 
correction of vice, exercising judgement without wrath ... nor 
abandoning a just severity in mildness'.


8. The Te Deum is optional and is seldom intoned and sung. After all, 
from the now informal preliminaries of a troupe of dancing girls, and 
approvals by a cross-section of his flock, a post-Conciliar bishop     
appears to occupy that office more by the will of his people rather 
than by the grace of God.


9. Of course, all the post-Conciliar liturgies are concelebrated with 
piece-meal prayers, a ruse to destroy the notion of a priest or bishop 
to be acting in the singular person of Christ.

     ...Paul VI drew inspiration from an anti-pope of the third 
century, Hippolytus, who separated from Rome because of doctrinal 
differences and established a schismatic church, but later recanted, 
returned to the Catholic Church and died a martyr for the Faith; his 
'Apostolic Traditions' now employed by Paul VI are believed to have 
been drawn up for his schismatic sect. The resurrection of the anaphora 
(Eucharistic Prayer No.2) and the consecratory form of Hippolytus are 
examples of liturgical archaeologism which was condemned by Pope Pius 
XII as'wicked' in 'Mediator Del', para 68....