"Fr." John Muddy who was ordained in 1990 called me the other day pointing out that he agreed with me that the newer bishops who themselves were ordained priests after 1970 aren’t bishops since they aren’t priests. With this in mind he claimed he was really ordained, and "Fr." Charles Trenchy, who was ordained in 2005 wasn’t ordained since Charles was ordained by "Bishop" Bill Beady who himself was ordained a priest in 1972.
"Fr." John is "doubly wrong." He is "Mr." John. His self-justifying argumentation is erroneous. Why? Throughout Church history, "matter and form" determine validity. If the matter or form is "wrong," then the sacrament is not confected, even if a pope does it. [I know a man "ordained priest" by the "pope" himself (after 1980) who decided he should be (conditionally) ordained or really ordained – that’s how much he believed in the core teachings of Catholicism.]
Therefore, anyone, including Mr. Muddy, who was "ordained" in the "Roman Catholic Novus Ordo Rite" after 1970 (or so) is still a layman. A layman even when episcopally commissioned to preside over or facilitate "non-Masses" (Novus Ordo Community Celebrations) and to be an episcopal collaborator is and remains a layman. He is not a Holy Ordered Catholic Priest.
Novus Ordo Rite of "Commissioning" Validates Our Contention
Here is how the alleged Office of the Priesthood is formally explained by the Bishop according to the 1978 rite (which finalized for the time being the 1970 changes). Here is the address to be given by the "bishop" – the address which discloses what he is about to do:
My son, you are now to advance to the order of the presbyterate. You must apply your energies to the duty of teaching in the name of Christ, the chief Teacher. Share with mankind the word of God you have received with joy. Meditate on the law of God, believe what you read, teach what you believe, and put into practice what you teach … In the memorial of the Lord’s death and resurrection, make every effort to die to sin and to walk in the new life of Christ.
Study this official statement of intent. It is evident from this statement of intent that everyone "ordained" after 1970 (or so) was commissioned or reminded to be a good catechist, a good religion teacher, a good contemporary episcopal policy-enforcer; a good "share-care-bear;" a good meditator; and, (as a final resort, to be holy) "a good guy" (one who tries to die to sin and to imitate Christ). Read over the "Novus Ordo Ordinal Introduction" as already cited. This official text proves our point. Also, read The Order of Melchizedek by Michael Davies for citations or conclusive proof texts.
One caution must be given. You should disregard Davies’ ridiculous theology. In effect, he contends [as in the translation of "multis" (which recently has been changed to mean "many" by Benedict XVI)] that black is not black or that the evidence doesn’t lead to its logical conclusion since (then as in recent times) the "Church" said black is white and the "Church" can’t err. However, it remains clearly logical and conclusive that you weren’t ordained to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass for the living and the dead as I was in 1966. Otherwise, black can be white by episcopal or papal decree!
Truly Catholic Ordination Deliberately Excluded
All Newchurch Novus Ordo presiders, liturgical facilitators and episcopal collaborators (wrongly referred to as "priests") were made so in such a way as to deliberately exclude the conferral of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. Why do I say so? Their (Newchurch’s) ordinal goes out of its way "to say so."
"Every prayer in the traditional rite which stated specifically the essential role of a priest as a man ordained to offer propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead has been removed" (from the ordinal)." The Order of Melchizedek, Michael Davies
With "invalidating and malicious intent," prayers such as the following were deleted for only one reason – to insure that the Revolting Bishops’ "New Mass" presiders and collaborators would not receive the Sacrament of Holy Orders:
"Theirs be the task to change with blessing undefiled, for the service of thy people, bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Thy Son." (Abolished)
"Receive the power to offer sacrifice to God, and to celebrate Mass, both for the living and the dead, in the name of the Lord." (Abolished)
"The blessing of God Almighty, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost come down upon you, and make you blessed in the priestly Order, enabling you to offer propitiatory sacrifices for the sins of the people to Almighty God." (Abolished)
Obviously, the "Bishops’" collaborators, presiders or facilitators are not ordained as Holy Ordered Priests. The "bishop" has explicitly said so in his official opening address. Therefore we agree with Francis Aidan Cardinal Gasquet:
"Today we find men of intelligence and good faith claiming to have the same Christ-given sacrifice and the same sacrificing priests as the Catholic Church, while they are using a new man-made liturgy from which, of set purpose, every notion of Oblation and Sacrifice has been ruthlessly removed, and their ministers are ordained by an Ordinal, which designedly was composed to express the rejection of the sacrificial character of the Catholic priest. The prayer for Christian Unity must go up from every heart, but if it is to be something more than sentiment, facts must be faced and resolved honestly." - Cardinal Gasquet, 4th Advent Sermon, at St. Patrick’s Cathedral, New York, in 1913, Chairman of Commission which composed Apostolicae Curae (which officially decreed the "far less apostate" Anglican Ordinal and Service to be "null and void" or invalid.)
See The Abbot and Me on Liturgy. Also, read "New Mass" Is Conclusively Invalid, both from MAETA at 1-888-577-4428.
Cardinal Gasquet composed the dogmatic Apostolicae Curae for Pope Leo XIII (the encyclical which dogmatically condemns the Anglican and Protestant liturgies). He, along with Pope Leo XIII employed a simple yet dogmatically binding principle: Ordinal defines Service; and Service defines Ordinal. This principle is "self-evident" as well as dogmatic. Therefore, if either Ordinal or Service substantially or "religion-wise" is incongruous with the Church’s Ordinal or Service, then both Ordinal and Service are invalid.
Pope Leo XIII in a formal way dogmatically condemned Episcopalian services and ordinals. Newchurch’s Services as well as Newchurch (Novus Ordo) Ordinals are far, far worse than or more heretical than the Episcopalian services (see New Mass is Conclusively Invalid for irrefutable "line by line" or detailed proof of such a statement). Therefore, a fortiori we must conclude that the Novus Ordo Ordinals and Services are invalid; and ipso facto sacrilegious.
"Fr. John, what was your first ‘Mass?’" It was concelebrated (hint, hint). What Service did you first pray after being "ordained?"
Was it a canonized and Apostolic Mass or was it one of the set of episcopal - Annibale Bugnini devised or implemented Services? Don’t be deceived -- Newchurch’s alleged "Roman Canon" is fake, fake, fake! – so it is no more a Canonized Latin Mass Liturgy than a dog is a monkey-wrench. This "canon" is a misnomer for one of the Novus Ordo Services inflicted upon the church by the Episcopal Liturgical Revolt of the 1960s.
Yes, you, Mr. John, just as "Mr." Charles, are not ordained. Both of you said a Novus Ordo Service at "ordination" or at your commissioning. Both of you are glorified laymen.
You both were commissioned presiders or facilitators for community celebration (as well as episcopal collaborators). Your first such community celebration, according to dogmatically established principles was not a Mass. What did your "bishop" commission you to be or to do? Obviously and primarily, he commissioned you to preside at "community celebrations" (usually, of the community’s sinfully presumed "Christ-ed-ness").
"Holy Ordered" Ordination
What is the immutable and sine qua non essence of Holy Ordered Priesthood? Why is a man made a priest in the Catholic Church?
Answer: Primarily, "uniquely" and essentially, a man receives Holy Orders to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and administer the priest-depended sacraments. The traditional Rite of Ordination explains this clearly and makes it crystal clear that this is what it accomplishes.
In the Church-given words of the Bishop to the ordinand, the office of the priesthood (before 1970) was explained according to the traditional understanding of what a priest should be. The ordaining bishop had a "validating intention" before 1970, before the canonized Latin Rite Ordinal (read Quo Primum) was most sinfully discarded, "trashed" and sacrileged by episcopal decrees in the revolting 1960s. Here are the words of Holy Orders used before 1970 to clearly "ordain" the ordinand:
"Dearly beloved son, as you are now about to be consecrated to the office of the Priesthood, endeavor to receive it worthily, and when you have received it, fulfill its duties blamelessly. The Priest is ordained to offer Sacrifice, to bless, to guide, to preach and to baptize. With great awe should one advance to so high a state…"
(At the end of the Catholic Ordinal, the ordinand is explicitly given the power to forgive sins sacramentally – this power is not given to Newchurch commissioned "fake priests").
Most significantly, I and all others who were ordained in the Latin Rite Patriarchate (to say Canonized Latin Rite Mass Liturgies) were explicitly ordained "TO OFFER THE HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS FOR THE LIVING AND THE DEAD…"
My final and abiding "Holy Orders" challenge – after I was ordained was to come to know more and more what I do (agnosce quod agis) [ever strive to understand more deeply the Divine Liturgy]; and, to ever strive to imitate Him Whom I bring among us and handle. Imitate Quem tractas – imitate Him Whom you "bring from Heaven to earth."
"In brief, it is impossible for any unbiased mind to compare the ancient Canon of the Holy Mass with the New Liturgy, without seeing that both in spirit and substance it was conceived (like the Bishops’ New Mass) with the desire of getting rid of the Catholic Mass altogether." - (Abbot Gasquet)
We agree with the composer of Apostolicae Curae. Do you?
We are led to conclude that alleged Novus Ordo "priests," are "fake, fake, fake!" By conveying the impression they are saying Mass they seriously violate the first three Commandments of God’s Law. They become sacrileges who commit sacrilege. If you are such, wake up, see the awesome truth, confess your sins and repent.
(A "Novus Ordo fake priest" might contend that my argumentation is too simplistic. All the more does it condemn him as "fake priest!" If one rejects this simplistic and irrefutable argumentation – what good would it do to get any more complex, with the "pharisaical likes of such dissenters?")
May Almighty God bless you. May the Holy Ghost agitate you to be dissatisfied with your Newchurch Ordinal/Services. May God direct your inquiries to remove your dissatisfactions. Among other things, may God lead you to honestly compare Newchurch services with the Canonized Latin Mass Liturgy (as is done in New Mass Is Conclusively Invalid, MAETA). Finally, may God grace and inspire you to renounce being a sacrilege committing sacrileges.
Radical, fundamental or essential problems of such "infinite magnitude" require radical solutions. Simply stated, anyone of sane mind and "decent conscience" will either abandon the Novus Ordo Farce OR he will seek true orders.
The first solution is self-explanatory. The second solution can be attained by contacting a valid "extra-ecclesially ordained" priest who was made a bishop. To obtain or reinforce proper convictions, I suggest one read my books, books such as Latin Mass Prayers Explained; Apocalypse of the Mass; My Basic Missal; The Mass that Made Padre Pio; etc. (MAETA 1-888-577-4428)