Fr. Jenkins argued (1981) that the removal of “ut” from the new rite of ordination entirely changed the meaning and therefore rendered it at least doubtful; and if it is doubtful, Fr. Jenkins went on to say, it must be treated as invalid (“a doubtful sacrament is no sacrament). As an aside, I (Robert Siscoe) have located four ancient Sacramentaries  that omit the word “ut,” which proves that it has no effect whatsoever on validity. 

1. Gregorian Sacramentary under Charles the Great, 9th century:   https://archive.org/details/gregoriansacrame00cath/page/n63 page 7.

2. Codices Sacramentorum libri 3. Sacramentorum Romanæ Ecclesiæ, Missale Gallicanum vetus (1680):  https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_6rVhPJ6sHdkC/page/n51 page 31;

3. Gerbert’s Monumenta veteris liturgiae alemannicae (1779)

https://archive.org/details/monumentaveteri01gerbgoog/page/n54 page 41.

4. The fourth is the Leonine Sacramentary.  Bottom of page 122:  https://archive.org/details/sacramentariuml00feltgoog/page/n144/mode/2up?q=Presbyterii