Don't mind the Conciliarist from Fish Eaters too much, Pax.
Cute.
He can't help it. He admits he goes to the Novus Ordo, so he has a desperate, personal reason for exonerating it.
That's pure fiction. I've been to the Novus Ordo about 4 times in the last 14 years.
But I do know what I'm referring to.
I do exonerate it from false charges, that doesn't mean it's not a liturgical failure.
Yet few on this board take him to task on that.
Why should people defend your false premises?
Because while everyone argues about old women and how it's OK for them to go (so long as they gain some "spiritual benefit", you understand), and how the Novus Ordo is a grace-giving event (it's "heresy" to deny it!), and how people who oppose it on principal are "exaggerating" or "over-reacting", they can't really correct the Conciliarist from Fish Eaters without seeming two-faced, can they?
By the very fact that you refer to me as "conciliarist" is proof of your inability to stop the B.S.
You can't correct me because you refuse to face the truth and you find the refuge of creating a straw man argument irresistible.
You can't correct me because when it comes down to the details on which the argument is built, you can't deny them.
My foundations of my arguments are correct, real and true. Yours are imprecise, subjective and contingent in nature,
It's like arguing with an Atheist and that makes sense because you are imbibing in a variant of Modernism and that always leads to agnosticism and eventually atheism.