Don't think I am intentionally picking on you Matthew, you just have such an influence in the traditional world(confessedly on myself).  But, you posted recently this:

"Is the Novus Ordo invalid? Well then you have to worry about the priest distributing "communion" from a previous Novus Ordo Mass. And are you genuflecting to the tabernacle before the Latin Mass is offered? If so, you might be adoring mere bread."

And, my question flows from your post.  And, my question is, would previously "consecrated" hosts consecrated by an invalid priest actually become truly consecrated after the mass of a valid priest celebrating mass at the altar of this tabernacle when his intention is to distribute such hosts?  

I am not convinced that these old hosts from an invalid mass sitting in the tabernacle would remain invalid if the new valid priest celebrating mass at that altar with that tabernacle has the intention of distributing those hosts.

Has the church addressed this issue?  Please help.

And, if it turns out that these hosts are invalid, how could one know?  Laity have no idea if there are or are not even any hosts at all in the tabernacle when they genuflect in NO churches.  So, with your thinking, there then could be valid hosts in the tabernacle that you are not genuflecting towards.  I can understand the avoid NO church argument, and that is a separate argument, but if you end up going into one, what is the best side to err on?  I think genuflecting is the side to err on, if we are even going to call it an error.

is New Order valid?  No!  Holy Orders, the sacrament was changed in 1968 about and there is no ordination, just like Luther did for the Lutherans.  Mass changed? Yes, Canon, "many" changed to "all".   You don't change the words of Christ.  He meant what he said, "Many".   Many are called and few are chosen.

not consecrated by a valid mass. 

At seminary the priest is (hopefully) taught that he makes the specific intention to consecrate only those things that are on the corporal, a square piece of cloth that is brought to the altar folded under the chalice veil and unfolded by the priest at the start of low mass or during the offertory at high mass. Theoretically, a priest could consecrate a massive amount of bread placed on a table, but in the old rite this would have constituted a massive, notorious sacrilege, and the guys in the black SUVs would have taken that man to the deepest, darkest part of Regina Coeli, ten stories beneath the Lateran.

Many times I have wondered about whether to genuflect upon entering a Novus ordo church.  I always genuflect conditionally, saying, Lord, if you are in there...  (Of course, there are some Novus Churches where I know the matter is certainly invalid, and I do not even bother to do that.)

For a while I was at FSSP in Scranton, PA.  It came to my intention that Novus Ordo hosts [from the sole Novus Ordo said on Saturday night for 3.5 people (there was a huge N O parish a block down the street that had "mass" at the same time, for crying out loud, and it was "conservative", to boot.)] were being mixed with the contents of what was consecrated by the daily Tridentine Masses and Sunday Masses.  I stopped receiving communion and a weak later the priest asked why.  I told him.  The priest started the practice of consecrating ciboria at that mass and only opening the tabernacle at the end of the communion service.  About two months later he secretly told me the practice had been stopped.  (At this point I would not receive communion at any FSSP chapel but will not elaborate here... read my post "sacramentum disordinis"...).  I guess the FSSP really neaded my endorsement. :D

But once again, this discussion is like talking about walking through a minefield while avoiding dog poop.

The N O is a sacrilege.  Avoid it.  Stay home, say your rosary, and preach in season and out of season to the apostates going there...

regards....

not consecrated by a valid mass.  

At seminary the priest is (hopefully) taught that he makes the specific intention to consecrate only those things that are on the corporal, a square piece of cloth that is brought to the altar folded under the chalice veil and unfolded by the priest at the start of low mass or during the offertory at high mass. Theoretically, a priest could consecrate a massive amount of bread placed on a table, but in the old rite this would have constituted a massive, notorious sacrilege, and the guys in the black SUVs would have taken that man to the deepest, darkest part of Regina Coeli, ten stories beneath the Lateran.

Many times I have wondered about whether to genuflect upon entering a Novus ordo church.  I always genuflect conditionally, saying, Lord, if you are in there...  (Of course, there are some Novus Churches where I know the matter is certainly invalid, and I do not even bother to do that.)

For a while I was at FSSP in Scranton, PA.  It came to my intention that Novus Ordo hosts [from the sole Novus Ordo said on Saturday night for 3.5 people (there was a huge N O parish a block down the street that had "mass" at the same time, for crying out loud, and it was "conservative", to boot.)] were being mixed with the contents of what was consecrated by the daily Tridentine Masses and Sunday Masses.  I stopped receiving communion and a weak later the priest asked why.  I told him.  The priest started the practice of consecrating ciboria at that mass and only opening the tabernacle at the end of the communion service.  About two months later he secretly told me the practice had been stopped.  (At this point I would not receive communion at any FSSP chapel but will not elaborate here... read my post "sacramentum disordinis"...).  I guess the FSSP really neaded my endorsement. :D

But once again, this discussion is like talking about walking through a minefield while avoiding dog poop.

The N O is a sacrilege.  Avoid it.  Stay home, say your rosary, and preach in season and out of season to the apostates going there...

regards....

What led you to the FSSP, White Wolf?

It would be wonderful if I didn't have to define my position on a pro +williamson resistance forum everytime I want to discuss a topic.  Because, there are the words you hear from +Williamson and the sspx.  And, those words are that the new rite is valid but illicit.  So, don't waste my time with cmri sede validity one liners.  So, I believe the new rite is valid.  I can relate with you white wolf about how you genuflect in NO churches.  There are NO churches I will genuflect in, and there are churches where I will not.  There are NO masses I will attend, and there are NO masses I will not.  Attendance at a NO may come as a shock to members of this forum(who also gasp at the prospect of home-alone-ism).  But, if we believe that the NO is valid, then I without question will prefer it to be as licit as possible.  Because, we cannot even dialogue with liberal Novus ordos, but we can dialogue with conservative Novus ordos.  And, news flash, if you cannot dialogue, there will be no progress towards conversion.  So, I favor that path without question.  And like Peter, Christ invites us to walk out to him on the stormy waters.  

  There are NO churches I will genuflect in, and there are churches where I will not.

Regardless of your opinion, you are in no way qualified to determine when and where you are in the presence of the Real Presence. The only course to take is to completely avoid the evil thing - consider that otherwise, you make a mockery of all those trad pioneers who battled against the evil thing so that future generation (you) would have the True Mass and sacraments.

Do not be one of the compromisers, it is on account of the compromisers that +50 years later, questions like yours are still being asked.

Archbishop Lefebvre recognized the validity of the Novus Ordo Mass.