[Question:]{.underline} Can I advise friends to attend the traditional Masses of priests ordained in the new rite?
[Answer:]{.underline} It is a great grace for priests ordained in the new rite to discover Tradition for the first time, as is frequently happening at the present time. In general, they have a strong faith and firm principles; they do not want to compromise, and are learning little by little about the crisis in the Church. Of course we must encourage them to celebrate the traditional Mass, for it is by this means that the crisis of modernism will be reversed little by little.
However, it is true that there can be a problem with priests who have been ordained in the Novus Ordo rite. There are frequently doubts about the validity of their priestly ordination (but not always), particularly if the ordination was done in English. These are called positive, for there is a reason to doubt, albeit only slight. This reason can be a possible defect of the intention of doing what the Church does. The traditional rite repeats in many different ways in different ceremonies the Catholic intention, defined by the Council of Trent, of ordaining a priest to offer sacrifice, and not just of appointing a presider on behalf of the community. This intention is obscured on purpose and by omission in the new rite. An example of this is at the handing over of the chalice, at which time in the traditional rite the bishop confers upon the newly ordained priest the power to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass for the living and the dead. These words are omitted from the new rite, instead being substituted with “Accept from the holy people of God the gifts to be offered to him.” Who cannot see that this is a radical and highly symbolic change?
There can also be a doubt about the form of ordination in the new rite. Although the words in the Latin are essentially the same, the prayer requests the “dignity of the priesthood,” and it can very well be wondered if the post-conciliar church gives the same meaning to this phrase “the priesthood.” The modernists have repeatedly tried to hide new concepts under the same words so as to confuse orthodox Catholics. In the New Mass and new rite of ordination, the priest is regarded as a leader of the assembly, the representative of the people, and not as a mediator, offering an unbloody sacrifice in the person of Christ. Add to this, the manifest and deliberate ambiguity in the translation of “priesthood” by the English word “presbyterate” (as in the original ICEL translation), of manifestly different meaning and connotation than the word “priesthood,” and it can readily be seen that there is a reason to doubt if it symbolizes and accomplishes the same thing, namely the transfer of the power of holy orders.
There can also be doubts about the episcopal consecration of the ordaining bishop, either because the form of consecration of bishops was radically changed or because the Catholic intention is no longer clearly expressed. Every theology textbook explains the principle that we cannot allow any doubt to hang over the validity of the sacraments. It would be a sacrilege to do so deliberately, for it would expose the sacraments to invalidity. That is why we must follow a “tutiorist” position with respect to administration of the sacraments, namely the safest possible course. Since it is generally not possible to resolve these doubts with certitude, the Society of Saint Pius X will in such cases recommend a conditional ordination, not only to avoid any danger of sacrilege but also because it would be of potentially great harm to souls to allow any doubt in the administration of the sacraments by these priests.
The sedevacantists exaggerate in this, and maintain that all these ordinations are quite simply invalid. There is no logical or theological basis for this opinion. It is rather a doubt that we can have in individual cases, concerning the validity of particular Novus Ordo ordinations, either because of ambiguity in the meaning or translation of the words that make up the form, or because there is a doubt as to whether the ordaining bishop was really a bishop and really had the intention of doing what the Church does.
Since it is generally not possible to resolve these doubts with certitude, the Society of Saint Pius X is obliged in such cases to recommend a conditional ordination in order to remove all doubt. However, it would be wrong to maintain that these priests are not priests at all; or to treat them as if they were not priests; or to regard this doubt, positive but very slight, as if it were a certitude.
Consequently, we are obliged to follow two different paths of action. One path of action is for our own selves and for our reception of the sacraments. Here we must follow the safest path, and so if we cannot know with certitude of the validity of the priestly ordination of the priest, we ought not to receive the sacraments from him, except in danger of death. It is for this reason that the Society establishes with certitude the validity of priestly ordination before allowing a priest to celebrate Mass in its chapels. This is becoming increasingly difficult, as most priests were now ordained in the new rite and the ordaining bishops, for several generations of episcopal consecrations, were ordained in the new rite also. Investigation of the form and intentions of these ceremonies is not easy.
The other path of action is for other faithful Catholics who are not yet traditional. Such traditionally minded priests, who are now turning towards Tradition, are much better for Catholics in the modern Church than any other priests, and so we should have no hesitation in recommending that people who are still in the Novus Ordo church receive the sacraments from them. It would be only if asked by traditional Catholics, or if the person is seeking to find out about it, that we could mention the doubts that we might eventually have concerning the validity of ordinations in the Novus Ordo church. We are not obliged to say anything, for we are not responsible for the doubt, and it is certainly much less of a doubt than elsewhere in the Novus Ordo church. Moreover, if we were to insist too much on this point (remember that it is only a doubt, and frequently only a slight doubt) we would risk putting off Catholics of good faith who are turning towards Tradition, and who would consider this doubt as a relatively minor detail in the whole picture that they are discovering.
Answered by Father Peter Scott, SSPX.