Happenby, I can understand how you could be scandalized by what I said.  I think there was a time when I would have been as well.  However, I am afraid you are placing an erroneous and gross interpretation on what I said.  Your reference to "apples and oranges" is a rhetorical distraction, whether intended or not.  Nor am I "assuming a seat greater than the Pope's to express a most disturbing analogy," although granted -- the analogy is quite disturbing as I most definitely wanted it to be.

Please recall that the Mass is a ritual.  It is not, nor will it ever be synonymous with the Blessed Sacrament, the Eucharist (100% holy).  Being 100% holy Christ (Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity) is obviously deserving of being treated in a most holy and reverential way, hence down through the ages Holy Mother Church has preserved for us the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass via the traditional Latin Ritual.  

Of course, there is no such thing as a bastard Christ.  For you to say that my comparison of a bastard child conceived by fornication "rudely suggests" such is beyond the pale.  That a child is given the status of bastard due to the circuмstances of its conception in no way infringes or changes in any way the inherent sacredness of the human life and of the human being conceived.  The condemnation of the evil of fornication in bringing about the life of the child does not attach to the inherent nature of the child.  If the infant receives a valid Christian Baptism it is a pure soul, perhaps far too beautiful for ordinary human contemplation.  Nevertheless the infant is still legitimately referred to as illegitimate and hence a bastard.  The Baptism in and of itself changes nothing in that regard.

If transubstantiation takes places in a Novus Ordo Mass the bread and wine become the infinitely holy Body, Bread, Soul and Divinity of Christ.  That is not at issue here.  What is at issue is the bastardized rite of the Novus Ordo Mass.  That Christ may possibly become present in the bastardized Novus Ordo Mass does not change the bastardized nature of the Novus Ordo Mass.  It remains a sacrilegious (and hence evil) rite.  At the same time the Holy Ghost has preserved the holy integrity of the Church's doctrine by never allowing the Church's Magisterium to strictly mandate under penalty of sin the attendance of the faithful at this sacrilegious rite.  

If you can bear it listen to some of the wise and courageous words of the great and saintly Abp. Marcel Lefebvre:

"It is precisely because this union desired by the liberals, between the Church and the Revolution and subversion, is an adulterous union, only of this adulterous union can come only bastards! And who are these bastards These are our rites, the laugh of the new Mass is a bastard ritual! The sacraments are bastard sacraments: we do not know whether these sacraments give grace or do not give it. "  See: Sermon of August 29, 1976 in Lille, in Ecône, pulpit of truth (Iris, 2015), pp. 997-998.


"Let us immediately destroy this absurd idea: if the new Mass is valid, we can participate in it. The Church has always forbidden to attend the masses of schismatics and heretics, even if they are valid. It is evident that we can not participate in sacrilegious masses, nor in masses that place our faith in danger. " See the Mass of the Almighty, Clovis, 2006, p. 391.


 "Your perplexity then perhaps takes the following form: can I attend a Sacrilegious Mass, but which is valid, if there is no other, and to satisfy the Sunday obligation? The answer is simple: these masses can not be the object of an obligation; We must also apply to them the rules of moral theology and canon law as regards the participation or assistance in a perilous action for the faith or possibly sacrilege. The new mass, even if it is said with piety and respect for liturgical norms, falls under the same reservations since it is imbued with a Protestant spirit. "  Open letter to perplexed Catholics, Albin Michel, 1985, pp. 42-43.