My contention is that the NOM is intrinsically evil only in the scholastic/philosophical sense of lacking something normal to its nature (eg., an offertory, or a man with one arm, etc.), but not in the moral sense.
It is in this sense that the SSPX and allied groups have taught the intrinsic evil of the new Mass.
Were this not true, then one would be at a loss to explain how Lefebvre said grace could pass to one who, allegedly, would be committing an intrinsically evil moral act (which by definition would mean the recipient would not be well-disposed, having erected the obex gratiae of insincerity to block the transmission of grace).
One would also be at a loss to explain how Lefebvre could say in 1980/1981 tgat the faithful could fulfill their Sunday obligation at the NOM, if in doing so, they were committing an intrinsically evil moral act (which by definition is exactly contradictory to the precept of sanctifying the Lord’s day).
Finally, we would be forced to acknowledge the very grave sins and unreliable leadership of an Archbishop Lefebvre who taught and permitted these allegedly intrinsically evil moral acts.
In other words, it is nonsense to claim as the Hewkonian/Pfeifferian’s do, that attending the NOM is an intrinsically evil moral act.