If Universal TLM Indult Comes To Your Parish - How Often Would You Go?

[Swiss_Guard]

**If the Holy Father … he’s within his rights and within his authority, which is absolute and immediate over the entire Church. That’s not an opinion, that’s canon law. **

Immediate and absolute? This means the pope can allow artificial contraception, abortion, homosexual marriage, women priests, etc. if his authority is absolute.

And here I thought the pope was bound by the teachings of Jesus Christ as He gave them to the apostles and passed down through the Church. My error.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

You didn’t answer my question so I’ll ask it again: What does in perpetuity up to a point mean?

If something is perpetual, it is forever. Saying something is allowed in perpetuity up to a point is like saying our eternal happiness in heaven will come to an end.

Every priest always has the right to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in any rite approved by the Holy See in private. The pope can forbid a rite, but he can’t forbid a priest to say an approved rite in private, unless he suspends his faculties, as is the case with Fr. Gruner.

If Quo Primum isn’t binding on future popes, then neither is Humanae Vitae.

That’s really disturbing. Humanae Vitae doesn’t touch on a discipline, it touches on an issue of faith and morals. If you don’t
understand the difference between that and a discipline, then I wouldn’t be opining as to how fully anyone else had converted to Catholicism. I don’t even know how to respond to the happiness in heaven bit, the two things are so far apart in their import.

The document that makes the guarantee of perpetuity can be abrogated and suppressed. That’s where “perpetuity” ends. The Pope most assuredly CAN forbid the celebration of any approved rite. He can restrict it to a certain place, to a certain people, etc. If you don’t understand that, you don’t understand the vast power the pope can exercise if he chooses to do so.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Immediate and absolute? This means the pope can allow artificial contraception, abortion, homosexual marriage, women priests, etc. if his authority is absolute.

And here I thought the pope was bound by the teachings of Jesus Christ as He gave them to the apostles and passed down through the Church. My error.

All of the things that you mention are issues of faith and morals, not the discipline of the life of the Church (into which the liturgy falls). Popes cannot do what you’ve written in your first paragraph because what you’ve written in the second is indeed true. The form of the Mass, celibacy of priests, who elects the pope, etc., all of those things are not immutable and yes, the pope has absolute power over those things. He can change them tomorrow. Look, go buy a copy of canon law. You’ll like it, mine has English on one side and Latin on the other.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Getting back to Cardinal Dulles, who is “orthodox” because he associated with Fr. Feeney… another quote from the article JK cited…

"The congregation, for their part, were not watching with scrupulous exactitude the movements of the celebrant. Some, on the contrary, were reciting prayers on mysterious strings of beads which Catholics call rosaries."

So the Holy Rosary is a “mysterious strings of beads”?
Yeah…uh huh…sure… real orthodox…yepper!

Also from the article
"Others were thumbing through pages of prayer-books and missals, which, for all I knew, might have been totally unrelated to the Mass."

For all he knew they might have been following the Mass. At least that’s what I do at the Traditional Latin Mass.

I never said he was orthodox because he hung out with Fr. Feeny! I said he was hardly a modernist!

And Cardinal Dulles is NOT dumping on the Rosary. The whole thing is about his initial experience of the Mass. Honestly, it doesn’t take much effort at critical reading to find the “voice” or purpose of the author.

 

[TradyDaddy]

I hope that the Mass of Paul VI lasts in perpetuity! At least by JK’s understanding of the word “perpetuity”.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I hope that the Mass of Paul VI lasts in perpetuity! At least by JK’s understanding of the word “perpetuity”.

That’s a straw man dodge. Well done, if you can’t convince them with truth and reason.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Look, let me make myself clear:

I have no beef with those who prefer the Tridentine Rite. I’ve always thought that the bishops should have done in actual effort and spirit what Pope John Paul asked them to do: offer to their people a wide and generous application of the Indult. They didn’t. If tomorrow, there was a radical, 180 degree backlash against the Pauline rite and a universal return to the Tridentine Mass, and the bishops stood there scratching their heads and wondering why, I’d be the one who stood up and reminded them that it was THEIR fault, with all the silly implementation and experimentation that they allowed and that they had no one to blame, but themselves. But I don’t believe it was all peaches and cream and Catholic ascendancy under the Tridentine Mass, as I know too many old Catholics who would not agree, too many who prefer the new Mass, who actually love it. And by and large, it isn’t all clown masses with honeybuns and cranberry juice for the matter and lesbian nuns doing the homily and helping with the consecration.

My beef is not your love of the Tridentine, but the way in which you cannot express that love, even at your most charitable, without denigrating the Pauline Mass, without at least a small, smug slap at it. You don’t understand, you seemingly refuse to understand, that people might love THIS mass as much as you love YOUR Mass (and it’s really sad, this “your mass, my mass” stuff). And NOW, those who prefer the Pauline aren’t fully Catholic. Great. And here I thought I was Catholic because I believed in all the Catholic Church taught.

 

[TradyDaddy]

I never said he was orthodox because he hung out with Fr. Feeny! I said he was hardly a modernist!

And Cardinal Dulles is NOT dumping on the Rosary. **The whole thing is about his initial experience of the Mass. **Honestly, it doesn’t take much effort at critical reading to find the “voice” or purpose of the author.

So now it’s his initial experience of the Mass? I thought the point of the article was to show that a non-modernist (because he associated with Fr. Feeney) was still capable of disliking the Traditional Latin Mass. Now we find that it was his “initial” reaction. Was that his initial reaction as a protestant? Imagine that; a protestant finding a dislike of the Catholic Mass. Please tell us.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

*Cardinal Dulles experienced what most converts experience with the Mass of St. Pius V: It is completely contrary to Protestant worship. Lex orandi, lex credendi applies here. Dulles prayed as a Protestant, therefore he believed as a Protestant. A believing Protestant will naturally be repulsed by the Mass of St. Pius V because it expresses the fullness of Catholic Truth. **Yet he wrote this as a Cardinal, a prince of the Church, a believing Catholic,not a Protestant. The Pauline Mass expresses the fullness of Catholic Truth. ***

You keep stating the Mass of Paul VI expresses the fullness of Catholic Truth but have not given an explanation. I’m not just going to take your word for it.
*

I suspect JKirk finds it easier to worship at the Mass of Paul VI because he is a convert. It’s much easier for a convert to worship at this Mass because it’s not as big of a transition from their Protestant worship as it is with the Mass of St. Pius V. LOL!!!

Absolute rubbish. I grew up Southern Baptist and I’ve never been to a Catholic Mass that was remotely like a Baptist service. What an incredibly easy way to dismiss someone, “well, they’re a convert, what do you expect?” I find it easier to worship at a Pauline Mass because it’s in a language that I understand and I can hear it. I’ve never dumped on the actual words of the TLM and I’m not about to do so, because they’re beautiful.*
You claim I dismiss you and then you go and prove my point. You like the Novus Ordo because it’s in English and you hear everything. It’s in English, just like a Baptist service, and it’s audible, just like a Baptist service. It also puts an emphasis on the community, just like a Baptist service. I never said the Novus Ordo was just like a Baptist service (I said it about a Lutheran service), I said it wasn’t as big of a transition from Protestant worship as is the Tridentine Mass. Thanks for proving my point.
*

I hope more parishes offer the Tridentine Mass in the event of a universal indult, but this is Chicago. We’re still recovering from 14 years of Cardinal Bernardin. Shoot, you’re still recovering from Cardinal CODY!

Cardinal Cody put the “disobedient clergy” (I’m trying to be as charitable as possible) in place. Cardinal Bernardin gave them free reign.
*

The Mass as the unbloody sacrifice of Jesus on the cross is clearly expressd in the Tridentine Mass. The prayers and rubrics ensure this expression. The Novus Ordo Mass puts an emphasis on “active participation.” There is very little room for interior contemplation of the mystery happening on the altar. The Tridentine Mass is more contemplative by its very nature.** A Novus Ordo Mass reverently celebrated achieves precisely the same effect. You’ve elevated subjective preference to an aesthetic absolute. It ain’t.**

Where is the silence in the Novus Ordo except for a couple of minutes after Holy Communion? Explain where the room is for interior contemplation of the mystery happening on the altar in a Novus Ordo Mass and I’ll retract my statement. Until then, it’s not a preference, it’s a fact.

---

Continued in the next post.

 

[TradyDaddy]

New definitions:
Perpetuity = until it is stopped
Universal = where the Bishop allows it
Non-modernist = hung out with Fr. Feeney
Extraordinary = Euch. Ministers (10-15 of them) at every service

 

[Swiss_Guard]

Continued from previous post.
*

The Tridentine Mass puts the emphasis where it belongs, on Jesus offering Himself to the Father, in the Holy Spirit, through the priest. The Novus Ordo Mass, with its emphasis on “active participation,” puts that emphasis on the community. The Pauline Mass does the same. “Active participation” for me means making the responses. I’m not a hand-holder nor a hugger.

Active participation for me is following the actions of the priest while I contemplate what he is doing on the altar. Talking during the entire Mass distracts me from actively participating in uniting myself to Christ as He offers Himself for me through the priest.
*

Fr. Hardon said it takes converts longer to convert to Catholicism with their heads than with their hearts. Someone who has already converted in his heart may not have converted in his head. It takes time to completely change your way of thinking.

And that, of course, is hardly smug. You’re taking my preference for the Pauline Mass on my part and making a leap that I’m not fully converted? You’ve completely identified the fullness of Catholic Truth in such a way that if anyone doesn’t agree with you regarding the TLM, well, they must not be fully Catholic. Garbage. You’ve elevated an outward form to the point of near idolotry, which is sad considering that the outward form is a vehicle that is supposed to lead to Christ, not the form itself.*

Fr. Hardon said that about Scott Hahn. He said Hahn was a friend of his and that he didn’t doubt for a moment that Hahn accepted all the teachings of the Church. However, he said he still thinks like a Protestant and that it takes time to change a certain way of thinking.

I don’t doubt your conversion at all. I don’t doubt you believe and accept all the teachings of Holy Mother Church. I just doubt that you have completely stopped thinking as a Protestant. As for being fully converted, none of us will be fully converted until we are with our Lord in Heaven.

I take exception to your comment about how I have elevated the Tridentine Mass to near idolatry. I have demonstrated how the Tridentine Mass clearly expresses the sacrifice of Christ on calvary in an unbloody manner. All you have done is say how the Novus Ordo is equal to it without any explanation. I can make the same charge that you are elevating the Novus Ordo to near idolatry because it is audible, in English, and is focused on the community.

I can also make a similar charge that anyone who doesn’t agree with you about the Novus Ordo is a schismatic. You never said that? Well, I never said everyone who doesn’t agree with me about the Tridentine Mass isn’t fully Catholic. You just jumped to that conclusion. I said the Tridentine Mass is fully Catholic. There is a difference.

**You know what would probably do a lot toward promoting the Tridentine Rite? If some of her devotees took a vow of silence. In terms of getting people in, they’re their own worst enemies. Everytime I think I should be more broad-minded, I run into some sanctimonious “traditionalist” and think,“Ugh, no thanks.” **

Now I’m sanctimonious, or are you going to claim you’re not calling me sanctimonious like you claimed you weren’t calling me arrogant and elitist when you called my comments arrogant and elitist?

That’s right, everyone who doesn’t agree with you needs to keep quiet. When you can’t counter someone else’s point, that person needs to take a “vow of silence” instead of you coming up with a logical rebuttal to that person’s point. This sounds like the Call to Action crowd. Don’t argue with us, just shut up and do what we say. We can’t logically refute you, so just shut up.

Saying something is so doesn’t make it so just because you said it. Explain your comments. You have yet to do this.

Just so you know, I attend the Novus Ordo more often than I do the Tridentine Mass, but if you want to lump me in with the “Traditionalists” such as the SSPXers and other schismatics, that’s your perogative. I know the truth.

**Oh, if you want to see sanctimonious, maybe all you have to do is look in the mirror. **

 

[Swiss_Guard]

Double post. Sorry about that.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

All of the things that you mention are issues of faith and morals, not the discipline of the life of the Church (into which the liturgy falls). Popes cannot do what you’ve written in your first paragraph because what you’ve written in the second is indeed true. The form of the Mass, celibacy of priests, who elects the pope, etc., all of those things are not immutable and yes, the pope has absolute power over those things. He can change them tomorrow. Look, go buy a copy of canon law. You’ll like it, mine has English on one side and Latin on the other.

You said the pope has absolute authority. Absolute means he is not bound by anyone or anything.

There was a rumor (and granted it was only a rumor) that Pope John Paul I was going to amend Humanae Vitae and allow Catholics to practice some forms of artificial contraception. We’ll never know just how true the rumors were because he died only a month into his papacy.

If a pope isn’t bound by another pope, then these rumors could very well have been real. A future pope can amend Humanae Vitae if he isn’t bound by another pope. There are many theologians who claim Humanae Vitae isn’t infallible. If a future pope agrees with them, then he can do to it whatever he wants.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

**You keep stating the Mass of Paul VI expresses the fullness of Catholic Truth but have not given an explanation. I’m not just going to take your word for it. **

I don’t particularly care if you take my word for it. It’s the Mass promulgated by the legitimate authority for the Church. That makes it fully expressive of the Catholic Faith.

**You claim I dismiss you and then you go and prove my point. You like the Novus Ordo because it’s in English and you hear everything. It’s in English, just like a Baptist service, and it’s audible, just like a Baptist service. It also puts an emphasis on the community, just like a Baptist service. I never said the Novus Ordo was just like a Baptist service (I said it about a Lutheran service), I said it wasn’t as big of a transition from Protestant worship as is the Tridentine Mass. Thanks for proving my point. **

On the contray, you did not say Lutheran, you said Protestant. And I haven’t proved your point at all, because the Pauline Mass is inherently Catholic. You’ve no room, right or cause to say I like the Pauline better because I’m a convert, esp. since lots of cradle Catholics like it better as well.

---

Where is the silence in the Novus Ordo except for a couple of minutes after Holy Communion? Explain where the room is for interior contemplation of the mystery happening on the altar in a Novus Ordo Mass and I’ll retract my statement. Until then, it’s not a preference, it’s a fact.

Continued in the next post.

Not all Novus ordo Masses are the same. At the monastery where I was rec. into the Church, there’s more silence than at a TLM. Where’s the silence in the TLM other than the Silent Canon (which at High Mass is oversung by the choir. How is that silent?)?

 

[Swiss_Guard]

That’s really disturbing. Humanae Vitae doesn’t touch on a discipline, it touches on an issue of faith and morals. If you don’t
understand the difference between that and a discipline, then I wouldn’t be opining as to how fully anyone else had converted to Catholicism. I don’t even know how to respond to the happiness in heaven bit, the two things are so far apart in their import.

As I stated in a previous post, there are many theologians who claim Humanae Vitae isn’t infallible. If a future pope agrees with them, he can amend it to say whatever he wants it to say. He wouldn’t be bound by a document promulgated by a previous pope because no pope is bound by a previous pope.

The document that makes the guarantee of perpetuity can be abrogated and suppressed. That’s where “perpetuity” ends. The Pope most assuredly CAN forbid the celebration of any approved rite. He can restrict it to a certain place, to a certain people, etc. If you don’t understand that, you don’t understand the vast power the pope can exercise if he chooses to do so.

What I don’t understand is your definition of perpetuity. Perpetuity can end if a pope says so?

I understand the vast power a pope can exercise. I also understand a pope cannot contradict a previous pope because this would mean the Holy Spirit contradicts Himself.

Again, we get back to a pope not being bound by a previous pope. If this is true, then I’m throwing away all of the encyclicals I bought written by Pope John Paul II because they don’t matter anymore since he isn’t the pope. I’m sure glad I never bought Theology of the Body because it no longer matters unless Pope Benedict XVI says so. That is as long as he is the pope.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

New definitions:
Perpetuity = until it is stopped
Universal = where the Bishop allows it
Non-modernist = hung out with Fr. Feeney
Extraordinary = Euch. Ministers (10-15 of them) at every service

I have to find me a dictionary with these new definitions. Do you know where I can pick one up?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

Continued from previous post.

**Active participation for me is following the actions of the priest while I contemplate what he is doing on the altar. Talking during the entire Mass distracts me from actively participating in uniting myself to Christ as He offers Himself for me through the priest. **Which is precisely what it is for me. I don’t talk through the Mass and neither do most of the people around me.

***Fr. Hardon said that about Scott Hahn. He said Hahn was a friend of his and that he didn’t doubt for a moment that Hahn accepted all the teachings of the Church. However, he said he still thinks like a Protestant and that it takes time to change a certain way of thinking. Fr. Hardon knows Scott Hahn, but you don’t know me at all. Just because I prefer the vernacular doesn’t make me less fully Catholic (again, lots of orthodox, cradle Catholics prefer it), just because I like to hear the canon doesn’t mean I like noise at church. You’re making astonishing leaps. ***

***I don’t doubt your conversion at all. I don’t doubt you believe and accept all the teachings of Holy Mother Church. I just doubt that you have completely stopped thinking as a Protestant. As for being fully converted, none of us will be fully converted until we are with our Lord in Heaven. ***Well, given your understanding of the pope’s authority, and the difference between Humanae Vitae and Quo Primum, I doubt you’ve begun to think like a Catholic. What you’ve expressed here doesn’t indicate any understanding of Church practice or polity.

I have demonstrated how the Tridentine Mass clearly expresses the sacrifice of Christ on calvary in an unbloody manner. All you have done is say how the Novus Ordo is equal to it without any explanation. I can make the same charge that you are elevating the Novus Ordo to near idolatry because it is audible, in English, and is focused on the community. **No, actually, you haven’t, you merely stated that it did. You didn’t provide examples or any kind of illumination on your assertion at all. And you certainly did not in your comparison of it to the NO Mass, as it clearly expresses the same. Why? Because the Church that created it says that it does. You didn’t **

**I can also make a similar charge that anyone who doesn’t agree with you about the Novus Ordo is a schismatic. You never said that? Well, I never said everyone who doesn’t agree with me about the Tridentine Mass isn’t fully Catholic. You just jumped to that conclusion. I said the Tridentine Mass is fully Catholic. There is a difference. **I never said you were schismatic, I said you were mistaken in your assertion, in the facts your were positing. Mistaken isn’t the same as schismatic.

**Now I’m sanctimonious, or are you going to claim you’re not calling me sanctimonious like you claimed you weren’t calling me arrogant and elitist when you called my comments arrogant and elitist? **I was always told not to pick up a rock if it didn’t have my name on it.

That’s right, everyone who doesn’t agree with you needs to keep quiet. When you can’t counter someone else’s point, that person needs to take a “vow of silence” instead of you coming up with a logical rebuttal to that person’s point. This sounds like the Call to Action crowd. Don’t argue with us, just shut up and do what we say. We can’t logically refute you, so just shut up.

**It’s not about agreeing with me. It’s about insisting that something is true when it patently isn’t. Confusing the import of Humane Vitae and Quo Prium in what the roles of each document are, the actual TYPE of issue being addressed by each document, it’s like insisting that the sun doesn’t rise in the East or that elephants don’t have long noses. I don’t care if you don’t agree with me, it’s just simply not true anyway. **

**Saying something is so doesn’t make it so just because you said it. Explain your comments. You have yet to do this. **On the contrary, I explained the difference between discipline and dogma. In stating that priests had the right to celelbrate the Pian rite in perpetuity, I explained that one pope didn’t have the power to bind future popes on discipline. When you responded with the bit on HV and QP, I pointed out the difference between the two. You’ll have to get a priest to explain it more clearly.

**Oh, if you want to see sanctimonious, maybe all you have to do is look in the mirror. **

**You’re the one going about questioning the fullness of people’s conversions, not me. **

 

[JKirkLVNV]

So now it’s his initial experience of the Mass? I thought the point of the article was to show that a non-modernist (because he associated with Fr. Feeney) was still capable of disliking the Traditional Latin Mass. Now we find that it was his “initial” reaction. Was that his initial reaction as a protestant? Imagine that; a protestant finding a dislike of the Catholic Mass. Please tell us.

So prefering the Pauline Rite, the Mass promulgated by the Church, IS an inherent sign of modernism?

Cardinal Dulles is not a modernist. His credentials for orthodoxy would stand up against anyone’s on this thread. And his understanding of the basic functioning of the authority of the Church would streak ahead of most of them.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

As I stated in a previous post, there are many theologians who claim Humanae Vitae isn’t infallible. If a future pope agrees with them, he can amend it to say whatever he wants it to say. He wouldn’t be bound by a document promulgated by a previous pope because no pope is bound by a previous pope. **It’s been the constant teaching of the Church, simply illucidated by the Pope. No, a future pope can’t. That would be heresy. Again, a difference between discipline and dogmatic teaching. **

What I don’t understand is your definition of perpetuity. Perpetuity can end if a pope says so? **One more time: the pope is free to abrogate/supress the celebration of any liturgical form. **

I understand the vast power a pope can exercise. I also understand a pope cannot contradict a previous pope because this would mean the Holy Spirit contradicts Himself. **In terms of discipline, a pope can most certainly reverse a predecessor. Look, look it up in New Advent or on EWTN. **

Again, we get back to a pope not being bound by a previous pope. If this is true, then I’m throwing away all of the encyclicals I bought written by Pope John Paul II because they don’t matter anymore since he isn’t the pope. I’m sure glad I never bought Theology of the Body because it no longer matters unless Pope Benedict XVI says so. That is as long as he is the pope.

Really, seriously, go talk to a theologian or canon lawyer. You go to Mass, go see your own priest. Ask them the difference between discipline and dogma. Email one of the apologists here. The last paragraph is unbelieveable.

 

[Swiss_Guard]

Originally Posted by Swiss Guard forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
***You keep stating the Mass of Paul VI expresses the fullness of Catholic Truth but have not given an explanation. I’m not just going to take your word for it. ***

I don’t particularly care if you take my word for it. It’s the Mass promulgated by the legitimate authority for the Church. That makes it fully expressive of the Catholic Faith.

So the Masses that St. Pius V abrogated were fully Catholic because they were promulgated by the legitimate authority of the Church?
*Are you saying the Mass of Paul VI is allowed in perpetuity because it is fully expressive of the Catholic faith because it was promulgated by the legitimate authority of the Church? Or is it in perpetuity until another pope ends it?

**You claim I dismiss you and then you go and prove my point. You like the Novus Ordo because it’s in English and you hear everything. It’s in English, just like a Baptist service, and it’s audible, just like a Baptist service. It also puts an emphasis on the community, just like a Baptist service. I never said the Novus Ordo was just like a Baptist service (I said it about a Lutheran service), I said it wasn’t as big of a transition from Protestant worship as is the Tridentine Mass. Thanks for proving my point. **

On the contray, you did not say Lutheran, you said Protestant. And I haven’t proved your point at all, because the Pauline Mass is inherently Catholic. You’ve no room, right or cause to say I like the Pauline better because I’m a convert, esp. since lots of cradle Catholics like it better as well.*
*I said in another thread that I saw a Lutheran service on public access that looked almost exactly like the Novus Ordo Mass. What I said about Protestant services is that it’s not as big of a transition to go from a Protestant service to the Novus Ordo as it is to go from a Protestant service to the Tridentine Mass. I can’t make myself anymore clear. If you still don’t understand it, then there’s nothing I can do.

Where is the silence in the Novus Ordo except for a couple of minutes after Holy Communion? Explain where the room is for interior contemplation of the mystery happening on the altar in a Novus Ordo Mass and I’ll retract my statement. Until then, it’s not a preference, it’s a fact

Not all Novus ordo Masses are the same. At the monastery where I was rec. into the Church, there’s more silence than at a TLM. Where’s the silence in the TLM other than the Silent Canon (which at High Mass is oversung by the choir. How is that silent?)?*
How can there be more silence at a Novus Ordo Mass when the “active participation” has someone talking at every moment? The answer is there cannot be more silence at a Novus Ordo Mass.

I’ve been to only a few Tridentine Masses where the choir is finishing the Sanctus while the priest says the canon. This usually happens when a priest doesn’t really want to say the Tridentine Mass. I know this for a fact because I’ve spoken to the priest.

I don’t know where you went to the Tridentine Mass, but the majority of Tridentine Masses are not like the one you describe.

Your lack of explanation has done nothing to make me change my mind about the Novus Ordo. While I still attend it daily (I’m doing the readings this Sunday and next Sunday), the inherent deficiencies in the Novus Ordo Mass are still giving me problems.

If you prefer the Novus Ordo, that is your perogative. You are in full communion with Holy Mother Church. The Novus Ordo is valid and licit. Christ is truly present when the priest says the words of consecration. I would sure like to know how I’m denigrating the Novus Ordo as you claim in another post?

Just because I don’t agree with you about the Novus Ordo doesn’t mean I’m denigrating the Mass.