Well, it's a matter of logic. If Bishop Williamson thinks that the Novus Ordo Mass is intrinsically evil, then he would forbid his flock to attend it under any circuмstances. If there are any circuмstances whatsoever when the Novus Ordo Mass can be safely attended that means that it is not in and of itself evil.

Question: Bishop, I go to Latin Mass on Sunday and probably don’t need to announce this, but during the week I go to a Novus Ordo Mass. [Bp. Williamson “Yes.”] It’s said in a very reverent way where I believe that the priest believe that they are changing the bread and wine. [Bp. Williamson “I understand.”]

Answer: Yes, OK, alright. There’s the principles and then there’s the practice. In principle the Novus Ordo Mass is a key part of the new religion which is a major part of the worldwide apostasy of today, and therefore, the archbishop [Abp. Lefebvre] would say, in public he would say, “Stay away. Keep away from the New Mass.”

You might as well wish hanged for a sheep as for a lamb. What’s the proverb? You might as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb. If you’re going to steal then steal a sheep and don’t just steal a lamb. What it means is, I’m going to stick my neck out I’m going to stick my neck out a long way and if anybody wants to chop it off they’re welcome. I would say that in certain circuмstances, like those that you mention, exceptionally, if you’re not going to scandalized anybody because they know that you’re a Catholic, they know that you’re sticking to the true faith, and then they see you at the New Mass, they may, the conclusion that many of them will draw is: the New Mass is OK because she’s going. You’ve got to be careful of that. So you’ve got to be careful.

I myself don’t think that the New Mass is always invalid. I don’t think that. I don’t think; archbishop Lefebvre didn’t think that. There’s nothing in the text of the New Mass which makes it inevitably invalid. There are people who say so, I don’t think that they’re right; according to Catholic theology I don’t think they’re right. I think, as you say, that it’s very possible that the consecration is for real. You say that it’s a priest who says it worthily. What I  would say is that tomorrow there are going to be many Novus Ordo priests who are going to come though while they’re going to be tradition priests who are not going to come through. Exactly what I’ve been saying or the principle I’ve been saying. Some of the last will be first and some of the first will be last. That I believe. That’s not a reason to go over to the Novus Ordo, far from it. The principles are clear and the wrongness of the Novus Ordo Mass as a whole is clear, but does that mean that every Novus Ordo Mass is invalid?

The golden rule is this, that the absolute rule of rules seems to me to be this: do whatever you need to nourish your faith. If to nourish your faith you need to (and the archbishop said if you what to look after your Catholic faith stay away from the New Mass – that he did say, so…). But, for instance, should I attend a Society [SSPX] Mass, I take the position do whatever you need, if you need to attend a society Mass, a decent Society Mass, just like she spoke of a decent Novus Ordo Mass, if you need to attend a decent Society Mass in order to nourish your faith go to the Society Mass. If you need to stay away from every Society Mass in order to protect your faith then stay away from every Society Mass. So it’s not something you can say to everybody. It’s case by case in my opinion. Some Resistance priests, who shall remain nameless but they do exist, say stay away from every Society Mass. I can understand, I don’t condemn the opinion, I can understand the opinion, it’s not my opinion but God knows who’s right. I may be wrong but I don’t think, I think that there are many Society Masses still capable of nourishing people’s faith without corrupting it. But the moment that you’re aware, if you go to a Society Masses you’ve certain got to keep your eyes and your ears open. You’ve got to watch and pray. And if, the moment you watch and listen and realize that there’s a false smoke coming in, that the priests is sliding, he’s not preaching against the Council [Second Vatican Council] any longer, he’s even suggesting that the Council is not so bad, he’s not talking against Pope Francis in anyway despite the horrors that are coming out of Pope Francis’ mouth, the incredible things he’s doing and saying: “Morality you’ve got to make up on your own”, he’s said, “Who am I to judge”, and then “there’s no Catholic God”. This pope is expressing himself in an incredibly dangerous and foolish way. You’ve got to stay away from that and when that starts creeping in to a Society Mass or when it’s clearly there in a Novus Ordo Mass you stay away.

But there are some Novus Ordo priests with Novus Ordo parishes they get in trouble with their bishops. They’re getting in trouble with their Novus Ordo bishops because they are nourishing and building the faith in their Novus Ordo parish. They celebrate Mass as decently as possible, they hold benedictions of the Blessed Sacrament, they encourage the rosary; the people respond, the Catholics respond, especially since he’s not yet against the mainstream authority. Then obviously the mainstream authority sooner or later sure enough will come down on him, they’ll move him to backwards parish or whatever it is, but the grace was passing.

I don’t know if any of you know, again I’m going to get hanged, but [shrugs shoulders] that’s in the contract; that goes with the territory. There have been Eucharistic miracles with the Novus Ordo Mass: 2001 one was in 'Barberville' [Barbeau] something like that, Michigan in the early 2000’s [actually 1996], Sokolka in Poland in the early 2000’s, and another one in New Jersey [Marlboro] in the early 2000’s. This is the Novus Ordo Mass and there are Eucharistic miracles. Recently in Argentina [investigations of Professor Castañon order by Cardinal Bergoglio] these miracles are still occurring why? Because while the new religion is false, it’s dangerous and it strangles grace and it’s helping many people to lose the faith, at the same time there are still cases where it can be used and is used still to build the faith.

I would like to say it’s all black or it’s all white but if I look at the way it is it’s something of both. Black is not white, white is not back, but the reality is: black or white, there’s an alternation of black and white, or there’s a mixture of black and white in grey; that’s real life. Therefore the essential principle is: do whatever you need to keep the faith. If a priest that you trust says “Stay absolutely away from the New Mass”, well if you trust him that might the advice to take. Or if he says “Stay absolutely away from the Mass of this priest because I know that he’s misleading”, that’s the advice to follow. But you make your own judgments. And our judge, when we appear in front of our maker, we’re going to answer for our own, we’re going to answer for whose advice we chose to follow. We’re not going to be acquitted simply because we followed the advice of a priest because the priests are obviously today are not necessarily reliable. I’ve got to watch and pray. I’ve got to use my own mind. I’ve got to make my own decisions in my own circuмstances.

Therefore, there are cases when even the Novus Ordo Mass can be attended with an effect of building one’s faith instead of losing it. That’s almost heresy within tradition, but that’s what I think. But I hope it’s clear that I don’t therefore say that the Novus Ordo Mass is good or that the Novus Ordo religion is good or that all Novus Ordo priests are good; it’s not the case, obviously not the case. Generally it’s a tremendous danger because the new religion is very seductive, it’s very soft and sweet and sticky and it’s easy to go with it and then lose the Catholic faith. You have a new and different faith. A happy clappy faith. Where everybody’s nice, everybody’s sweet, nobody has original sin. The only sin that’s still left is nαzι sin, that’s the new religion. And Hitler is the devil, the six million are the redeemer which means that the Jєωιѕн people are God, that’s the religion today and that’s deadly, absolutely deadly, its got nothing to do with the Catholic faith except that it’s a clever imitation of the Catholic faith because you get Auschwitz instead of Golgotha and the gas chamber instead of the cross. That’s deadly. But ask yourselves: what is the real religion of the people today, what is the real religion of the state today? Can I blaspheme Our Lord Jesus Christ, does anybody worry? No problem, blaspheme as much as you like. Can I blaspheme against the h0Ɩ0cαųst by saying that there were no gas chambers? Horror! Horror! Horror! [raises hands] Burn him at the stake; he’s a heretic. There, you can see what is the real religion of the government today, of politics today, and of the Mass of people today, and it not of the Catholic religion. And the Conciliar religion is sliding in that direction. Be very careful and be very careful of the, stay away from the Novus Ordo but exceptionally, if you’re watching and praying, even there you find the grace of God. If you do make use of it in order to sanctify your soul.

I think that was one ball that went down the alley and sent all the skittles flying [grins]. Do understand me rightly, I think you do. I think you probably do. But I’m going out on a limb there, but there it is. I think it’s the truth, therefore I would not say every single person must stay away from every single Novus Ordo Mass. I don’t, it’s, if they could trust their own judgment that attending this Mass would do them more good than harm spiritually. But it does harm in itself there’s no doubt about that. It’s a rite designed to undermine a Catholic’s faith and make them believe in man and to stop, to turn their belief away from God towards man. The whole the new religion, and the Nouvs Ordo Mass is an essential part of the new religion, is design to get you away from the Catholic faith and that’s why the rule of thumb is, will remain, stay away from the Novus Ordo Mass. But exceptionally, the wises thing to say in private to this or that person but here I am saying it in public, that may be foolish but you must work it out for yourselves.

I go with the position of Fr. Hesse.  He knows a lot more about this subject than most.  This video is a must see...  

Quote from: Centroamerica

In the case of the New Mass, as well as other conditions lacking, this applies only to the Latin Rite and not the "whole Church", so it cannot claim the note of infallibility.  This is the classic SSPX position, and it is far from schismatic.

This is one of the divisions for law from Wernz-Vidal:
"III. By reason of its extension [ambitus] into: a) universal, which applies in the whole Catholic world; b) particular which has force in a certain limited territory only." (Wernz-Vidal, Ius Canonicuм 1:50.)

That is why the laws promulgated for the Latin rite, and not limited to a specific region, are said to be universal, and laws promulgated for particular dioceses, nations and particular churches (e.g. the Maronite Church) are said to be particular laws.

The NO Mass is certainly a universal law because it applies to the whole world, not to a particular territory.

What you are saying here is not the SSPX position. The (Old) SSPX position is that the NO Mass was never promulgated because of defects in the process of promulgation.

People are having a hard time understanding Bp. Williamson's answer about the NO because his answer is confusing. The N.O.W. analysis was right about several things, one of which is certainly that his answer was "all over the place", inconsistent and contradictory.

If we take the words Bp. Williamson used and try to find the principles behind them, as I tried, we must conclude that HE does not hold the Traditional Catholic principles about the NO, because then his answer would have been an unconditional 'no'.

But his words at other times seem to indicate that he does. So what does he hold?

Looking at the evidence, I can see only two possibilities: either he does not hold to Catholic principles in this matter, or he is arguing from the position of subjectivism (something like: nevermind the principles, do what you think is right).

Now, any judgment not based on Catholic principles is dangerous and wrong, while subjectivism is the philosophy of the liberals.

So, as I said, both is troubling.

I will accept correction if someone can prove my original analysis was wrong.

I mean, you seem to have an education, or even seminary experience.

What you are saying here is not the SSPX position. The (Old) SSPX position is that the NO Mass was never promulgated because of defects in the process of promulgation.

Quote from: Centroamerica

I mean, you seem to have an education, or even seminary experience.

Seminary experience? My guess would be 6-7 years of it. He might have experience offering Mass as well; Let's just say I wouldn't be surprised.