Paul VI eliminated those words only 22 years later. Paul VI, far from preserving the ancient rite, purported to make new "essential words" for the consecration of a bishop -- which contained no words from the ancient form, and not one word of the essential words Pius XII defined in 1947 -- except the word "and".

Paul VI uses the term "Governing Spirit", which does not refer unequivocally to the making of a new bishop. Thus, Paul VI's episcopal rite does not have the "res sacramenti" necessary for a valid consecration of the bishop, as it never refers to the effect of the rite, or what the rite does, i.e., make a priest into a new bishop.

Why did Paul VI do this? Answer: he was an antipope set on destroying the Apostolic succession in the Church by invalidating the episcopal consecrations; he was not a true Pope. This is something a true Pope never could do, as such a ceremony is part of the infallible "universal and ordinary magisterium" of the Church as defined, among many other places, at Vatican Council I in 1870, and as such cannot contain error or lead the faithful into sin. Paul VI's revision of the rite of episcopal consecration in 1968 does not contain the "res sacramenti" necessary for a valid sacrament. In fact, his "essential words" in his revised rite could apply to a 7 year old child receiving confirmation in her parish church, but does not describe anything unique to a bishop who is receiving the fullness of the priesthood.

Thus, all the "bishops" made since 1969 using the rite of Paul VI are invalid; all the priests they have purportedly ordained are necessarily invalid; and all the sacraments dependent on Holy Orders (Penance or confession, Holy Eucharist, Confirmation, Holy Orders itelf, Extreme Unction or the Sacrament of the dying),  which these invalid bishops and invalid priests have tried to perform since 1969 -- are also necessary invalid. This is an earth-shaking conclusion, but a necessary one -- again, if words mean anything. This is also an Apocalyptic conclusion. For further information and documentation:

See www.October1958.com, and also the articles on the right hand side of www.realnews247.com entitled:

Pope Leo's Vision of Satan's 100 Years of Increased Power, and the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary

Now, let us proceed to Fr. Campbell's excellent sermon on this subject.

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

(Lk.11:17)

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

the faith, the faith of our fathers, handed on to us from the Apostles by saints and martyrs, the fathers and

doctors of the Church, and holy popes and bishops. Now it is our turn to teach the faith, handing it on to the

younger generation unchanged and untainted by heresy, lest the Church become the desolate kingdom spoken

of by Our Lord in the Gospel.
 

Many, “with empty words,” have tried to destroy the Catholic faith – Arius, Luther, Calvin, and Cranmer, to

name a few. Then there came the Modernists, condemned by Pope St. Pius X, but whose heresies lived on to

be re-hatched at Vatican II by the liberal theologians, and canonized by the conciliar popes.

If one were to set out to destroy the Catholic faith, a good place to begin would be to tamper with the

Sacraments, the Sacrament of Baptism, for instance. Ah, but every well instructed Catholic knows that the

essential rite of Baptism requires the pouring of water upon the head of the person (or immersing the person in

the water) while saying the words: “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy

Ghost” (or Holy Spirit).

If the priest baptizing were to say, “I pour upon you the life-giving waters of salvation, that you may share the

life of the Holy Trinity,” we would know beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Sacrament was invalid, and

that the person would have to be re-baptized using the form that is required for validity. We would not have to

wait for the theologians to debate the matter, or for the Holy See to issue a decree of nullity. Any Catholic in

his right mind would know that the attempted Baptism was invalid. Any attempt by the “liturgical experts” to

change the essentials of the Sacrament would not have been tolerated by the Catholic faithful.

Not so with some of the other sacraments. Most of us knew little of what was required, for instance, for the

valid consecration of a bishop. It was usually a rare event administered in Latin amid mysterious and lengthy

ceremonies. Change the form of this Sacrament, and who would notice? Then what better way to destroy the

Catholic Church than to render invalid the Sacrament of Holy Orders, since true bishops are absolutely

necessary if the Church is to survive?

The essential matter and form for the valid consecration of a bishop was determined by Pope Pius XII on

November 30, 1947, in the Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 40, 1948, 5-

7), a document which has all the essential characteristics of infallibility, according to reputable theologians

like J.M. Hervé and Felix Capello (wandea.org.pl). Accompanying the laying on of hands, the consecrating

bishop was to say the words of the Preface, “of which,” says the pope, “the following are essential and

therefore necessary for validity: ‘Fill up in Thy priest the perfection of Thy ministry and sanctify him

(Comple in sacerdote tuo ministerii tui summum, et ornamentis totius glorificationis instructum coelestis

unguenti rore sanctifica).
 

At the end of the document Pope Pius XII states: “We teach, declare, and determine this, all persons not

Pope Pius XII’s body had hardly begun “a-mouldering in the grave” when the agents of change began working

in earnest to destroy the Catholic faith. Paul VI, once the confidant and trusted friend of Pope Pius XII, had

that “audacity to contradict” when he published his own decree in 1968. In vain did Pope Pius XII “teach,

declare, and determine” what was required for the validity of the Sacrament of Orders. Paul VI would

introduce entirely new words, requiring them for validity, words which were never used for the consecration

of a bishop in the Roman Rite: “So now pour out upon this chosen one that power which is from you, the

your name” (Pontificalis Romani, June 18, 1968).

As to why Paul VI found it necessary to discard the essential words of the traditional form of consecration and

replace them with entirely different words, he says “…it was judged appropriate to take from ancient sources

the consecratory prayer that is found in the document called the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus of Rome,

written at the beginning of the third century.”

Judged appropriate? By whom? None other than Archbishop Annibale Bugnini and his associates of the

“Consilium,” who invented the Novus Ordo Mass. And who on earth was Hippolytus of Rome? He was an

anti-pope of the third century who separated from Rome because of doctrinal differences and established a

schismatic church, although he later returned to the Catholic Church and died a martyr. Who knows but that

his “Apostolic Tradition” was drawn up for his schismatic sect?

And whatever became of Pope Pius XII’s Apostolic Constitution, Sacramentum Ordinis? You can find almost

any papal document you want on the internet, but that one has been “yanked”. Obviously they can’t afford to

let us think about it. The name Sacramentum Ordinis was even given to another document by John Paul II,

probably as a red herring to throw us off the track.

What conclusion does one draw? The Catechism of the Council of Trent states: “In our Sacraments… the

form is so definite that any, even a casual deviation from it renders the Sacrament null.” We would never

tolerate a change in the form of the Sacrament of Baptism. Never! Can we blithely accept a total deviation in

the form of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, a change which omits the part of the traditional form declared

essential for validity by Pope Pius XII? I think not! Pope Pius XII changed nothing of the traditional form,

but merely designated which part of the form was essential for validity. Paul VI omitted that essential part of

the form and replaced it with something entirely new. Not even popes (certainly not would-be popes) can

change the form of a Sacrament. Whom do we trust, Pope Pius XII, who carefully guarded the traditional

sacramental form handed down from ages past, or Paul VI? Paul VI, who on the flimsiest of pretexts, changed

the essential form of a Sacrament, thus rendering it invalid. The result is that we are left with a whole

generation of pseudo-bishops attempting to govern the Church without the grace of office. A miter and a

bishop’s ring do not a bishop make. And the Kingdom is brought to desolation (Lk.11:17).

But even among traditionalists many refuse to consider the possibility of invalid sacramental rites. It’s more

convenient to think that if the pope says so it’s got to be OK. But Paul VI told us the Novus Ordo Mass was

OK, and look where that has brought us. The day must come when all awaken to the fact that the Church has

been brought low by an apostasy more monstrous than we have been willing to admit. Only then will the true

bishops emerge, a true pope will restore the hierarchy, and the Church will rise more glorious than ever. “And

all mankind shall see the salvation of God” (Lk.3:6). †