Loudestmouth:

1) Please cite for me where +Williamson says that because he believes certain NOM Eucharistic miracles are legit, its ok to attend the NOM.

He says that one "should" not attend because it might endanger the faith, but there's no objective standard there for making attending the NOM unacceptable.  I could attend the NOM with zero danger to my faith.

He says that one "should" not attend because it might endanger the faith, but there's no objective standard there for making attending the NOM unacceptable.  I could attend the NOM with zero danger to my faith.

He made the objective argument 12 times in 11 minutes in Mahopac.  Perhaps you (needed to?) miss that?

From the Mahopac conference video:

1:02:17 - "There's the principle and there's the practice. In practice the new Mass is a key part of the new religion, which is a major part of the worldwide apostasy of today." Conclusion: The new Mass is bad. 

1:02:34 - "Archbishop Lefebvre, in public, would say stay away. Keep away from the new Mass." Conclusion: The new Mass is bad. 

1:03:10 - "In certain circuмstances, like those you mentioned, exceptionally, if you're not going to scandalize anybody..." Conclusion: The new Mass is dangerous. 

1:03:29 - "The conclusion many of them are going to come to [i.e., people who see you go to the new Mass] is that the new Mass is OK." Conclusion: The new Mass is not OK to go to. 

1:04:35 - "The principles are clear, and the wrongness of the Novus Ordo Mass is clear." Conclusion: The new Mass is bad. 

1:05:00 - "The Archbishop said if you want to look after your faith, stay away from the new Mass." Conclusion: The new Mass is bad. 

1:08:40 - "The new religion is false, and it strangles grace." Conclusion: The new Mass is bad. 

1:10:30 - "But I hope its clear that I don't therefore say that the NOM or Novus Ordo religion are good; that's obviously not the case." Conclusion: The new Mass is bad.

1:10:40 - "Generally, it’s a tremendous danger because the new religion is very seductive...and it’s very easy to go with it and lose the faith." Conclusion: The new Mass is bad. 

1:12:24 - "Stay away from the Novus Ordo, but exceptionally, if you're watching and praying, even there you can find the grace of God." Conclusion: The NOM is dangerous; stay away from the NOM. 

1:13:24 - "But it does harm in itself, there's no doubt about it." Conclusion: The Novus Ordo is bad. 

1:13:45 - "It’s a rite designed to undermine the Catholic faith." Conclusion: The Novus Ordo is bad. 

attending the New Mass is "acceptable" per se, but only wrong per accidens on account of the danger it may pose to someone's faith.

That's why I became a Traditional Catholic and adhere to the movement. The Novus Ordo is dangerous to the Faith. That's the foundation MY Traditionalism rests on.

It's enough of a reason to disobey the Pope, be aloof from Church authorities, assist at unapproved Masses at unapproved chapels, etc.

I'll go one further: not only does it SEEM TO BE dangerous, but we actually have 5 decades of proof "What happens to a person who regularly assists at the Novus Ordo Missae". So it's not even like we could be wrong.

Admittedly, this justification wouldn't apply to early 70's Trads, but we modern-day Trads have that argument to lean on in addition to many other justifications, and this latest argument (the Argument of Recent History) is nothing to sneeze at.

But I would respond, "And Pride goeth before a fall."

They attack Trads for being prideful, critical, negative, etc. but who is more proud? The one who doesn't trust himself and avoids the danger, or the one who says, "I'LL be fine... no problem!"

Looking at the raw statistics, it would be foolhardy, proud, and imprudent to throw myself into a milieu that many smarter, holier, and better man than I have fallen under. Not every Conciliar dupe has a lower IQ than me, is uneducated, or wicked. It's shocking how powerful the allure of Modernism can be.

It's like the One Ring. DON'T MESS WITH IT. And if you do find yourself in possession of it, DON'T PUT IT ON or USE IT. Anyone, even Gandalf or Galadriel, could be corrupted by its evil.

Perhaps, but danger to my faith isn't the primary reason to avoid the NOM.  I wouldn't attend an Eastern Orthodox Liturgy either, even if it posed no danger to my own faith.  NOM is a Protestantized bastardization of the Catholic Mass, and I hold that, as such, it objectively displeases and offends God.

Bishop Williamson puts a lot of stock in private revelation but he's never mentioned Marie Julie Jahenny to whom Our Lord (allegedly) foretold the New Mass, which Our Lord called "odious" and as containing "words from the abyss" (undoubtedly a reference to the replacement of the Catholic Offertory with a тαℓмυdic table prayer).

I hold that the NOM is odious to Our Lord, a blasphemy against the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and a grave insult against all those who opposed to Protestant deformers.  That is why I will not assist at it, and not primarily due to dangers against my faith.

alleged words of Our Lord to Marie Julie Jahenny:

I give you a warning. The disciples who are not of My Gospel are now working hard to remake according to their ideas and under the influence of the enemy of souls a MASS that contains words that are ODIOUS in My sight. When the fatal hour arrives when the faith of my priests is put to the test, it will be (these texts) that will be celebrated in this SECOND period ... The FIRST period is (the one) of my priesthood which exists since Me. The SECOND is (the one) of the persecution when the ENEMIES of the Faith and of Holy Religion (will impose their formulas) in the book of the second celebration ... These infamous spirits are those who crucified Me and are awaiting the kingdom of THE NEW MESSIAH.  Many of My holy priests will refuse this book sealed with the words of the abyss.  Unfortunately amongst them are those who will accept, it will be used.

I always believed only a priest could touch the Sacred Consecrated Host ... and now scientists can?
Talk about doing the wrong thing for the right reason or some such thing.

I always believed only a priest could touch the Sacred Consecrated Host ... and now scientists can?
Talk about doing the wrong thing for the right reason or some such thing.

Yeah, I don't believe that's the case here, but I most certainly agree ... though in the Novus Ordo any housewife can just carry around "consecrated" hosts around in her pocket.  I'm sure there are a number of (mostly Jesuit) priest scientist who could do any necessary work in this regard.