[Dominick]

If you had any smarts, you'd know Trent and its definition of the true Mass is at the heart of what all the conflict is about.

This is not the case at all. Nothing in the Novus Ordo conflicts with Trent, unless you quote little tiny pieces of it, from an SSPX pamphlet.

The Novus Ordo subverts the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, as well as the dogma of Transubstantiation

This is also untrue, and it has been shown untrue to you. The conclusion you have made simply has to have facts to fit it.

Another fruit of the SSPX, the snide lie.

[GirlShortstop]

Nothing in the Novus Ordo conflicts with Trent, unless you quote little tiny pieces of it, from an SSPX pamphlet.

Sure looks like the only way out (since acknowledging and embracing the truth of the matter is SSPX apologetics' anathema) is movement further away from Rome.

Sede in the mornin'...
Sede in the evenin'...
Sede 'round supper time!

[ultima ratio]

You write, "This is not the case at all. Nothing in the Novus Ordo conflicts with Trent, unless you quote little tiny pieces of it, from an SSPX pamphlet."

You don't know what you're talking about. Here is Ratzinger himself on the issue, speaking at the conference at Fontgombault:

"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 here is Professor Roberto de Mattei of Una Voce Italy, speaking at the same conference of Catholic liturgists:

"The lex credendi-lex orandi relationship, which is implicit in the liturgical reform, should be viewed in the light of the new theology which prepared the way for the Second Vatican Council, and which above all tried to give direction to what developed from it. In this sense, the lex credendi expressed bv the Novus Ordo appears as a revision of the Catholic faith by refraction through the anthropological and secularist 'turn' of the new theology – a theology, it must be emphasised, which not merely re-presents the themes of Modernism, but appropriates these themes in a Marxist sense, that is to say, by way of a system of thought which offers itself as a radical 'philosophy of practice.'"

In other words, the change in the Liturgy was made deliberately to change people's faith. Noting these criticisms by renouned Catholics, Michael Davies wrote the following in an article called "Redefining Trent", published in the Latin Mass Society Newsletter:

"This is a very serious and very radical criticism. Can it in any way be justified? Note in particular the reference to the fact that this new theology prepared the way for Vatican II. Cardinal Ratzinger certainly accepts that this is the case. He analyses the thinking of a representative selection of contemporary theologians and liturgists and concludes that: 'A sizeable party of Catholic liturgists seems to have practically arrived at the conclusion that Luther, rather than Trent, was substantially right in the sixteenth century debate', and adds: 'one can detect much the same position in the post-conciliar discussions on the priesthood.' He refers also to theologians who share Luther’s opinion that it is, 'the most appalling horror and a damnable impiety to speak of the sacrifice of the Mass'."