You can play this game till the cows come home. The New Missal here and there repeats a portion of a great prayer--so what? It is the entirety that matters and the meaning of the whole--which the Novus Ordo suppresses--that counts. Here is Ratzinger at Fontgombault whom I cite for the thousandth time:
"It is only against this background of the effective denial of the authority of Trent, that the bitterness of the struggle against allowing the celebration of Mass according to the 1962 Missal, after the liturgical reform, can be understood. The possibility of so celebrating constitutes the strongest, and thus (for them) the most intolerable contradiction of the opinion of those who believe that the faith in the Eucharist formulated by Trent has lost its value."
And speaking of the way the theology which undermines the faith by focusing on the assembly instead of worship of the Father--and then passes so easily from liturgy into practice, he states further:
"The serious nature of these theories comes from the fact that frequently they pass immediately into practice. The thesis according to which it is the community itself which is the subject of the Liturgy, serves as an authorisation to manipulate the Liturgy according to each individual’s understanding of it. So-called new discoveries and the forms which follow from them, are diffused with an astonishing rapidity and with a degree of conformity which has long ceased to exist where the norms of ecclesiastical authority are concerned. Theories, in the area of the Liturgy, are transformed rapidly today into practice, and practice, in turn, creates or destroys ways of behaving and thinking."
In other words, the Liturgy destroys the faith. It destroys a true concept of the Eucharist in particular. It destroys those doctrines emphatically stressed by Trent. How much clearer can it get?
The Cardinal's not talking about the Novus Ordo, ultima, but rather "So-called new discoveries" and the "thesis according to which it is the community itself which is the subject of the Liturgy". This is not contained in the NOM - it is invention of erring "liturgists".
ultima, read the quote - you're misunderstanding him. He attributes the problem to "theories" and a "thesis" - he never attributes this thesis to the NO, which he know quite well doesn't teach the idea that "liturgists" should reinvent the Mass every Sunday.