Expert: Griff Ruby - 1/17/2007

Question
It is the NOM valid?

Answer
On the whole, probably not, but there may be some exceptions.
The thing here is, with sufficient pre-Vatican II training and ordination, a rightly disposed and knowledgeable priest can attain sacramental validity even with the Novus Ordo, though of course he still sins gravely in doing it at all since it is illicit (from a truly Catholic standpoint).
Increasingly, as the old-school priests fade away and become rarer, the new generation by and large do not celebrate it validly.
The problem is ambiguity.  Where the traditional Catholic formula has it "FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH: WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS" and the Novus Ordo changes "FOR YOU AND FOR MANY" to "FOR YOU AND FOR ALL" and also turns "THE MYSTERY OF FAITH" from part of the formula itself to something the audience is meant to "proclaim" each of these changes constitutes a significant change in the meaning of the words, and as such it is difficult to say the new words with the old word meanings (but not impossible).
"FOR YOU AND FOR MANY" refers specifically to the Church, and part of every priest's training is Sacramental Theology in which the true meaning of this is explained in detail.  The Eucharist is the sacrament of the unity of the Church, and not of unity between the Church and the world (in the sense of world, flesh, and the devil).
"MANY" would respond to the call of Christ, but sadly not everyone, or "ALL."  And this is exactly as "many" grains of wheat go into the "one loaf" but not all, and "many" grapes go into the one chalice, but not all, "many" persons go into the "one Body of Christ, the Church," but not all (by their own choosing).
The new "priests" (themselves doubtfully ordained under the Novus Ordo changes to the Sacrament of Holy Orders) are taught that the whole statement is a "narrative," a mere retelling of the story of Jesus having one last meal with His disciples.  Then in the words used, they say "FOR ALL" by which they reasonably assume (no one tells them different in the Novus Ordo seminaries) that "ALL" is everyone, i. e. the whole world, and not merely the Church.  So this perverts it into a "sacrament of unity" between the Church and the world (world, flesh, and the devil), UNLESS the priest, on his own initiative, and educated in the old school, means by "ALL" merely "ALL OF YOU" (as in "take this, all of you, and eat of it...")or all of the Church, in other words the "MANY" spoken of in the Catholic formula.
When he follows the Novus Ordo formula, which one does he mean?  "ALL" meaning "all the Church" or "all of you" which could be valid, or "ALL" meaning "everyone all around the world and He's got the whole world in His hands, etc." which is categorically invalid?  Did he even mean to "do" the work of Christ (Alter Christus) or merely reiterate a narrative, rattling off so many words like an actor playing a part?  There is no reliable way to tell.
Hence it is proper to say that the Novus Ordo formula is "sacramentally doubtful" on the strength of this one deviation from the Catholic norm alone.
But then there is still the other hurdle, and this too needs to be meant correctly or else it is invalid.  "THE MYSTERY OF FAITH" is what the priest has just done, what the Church calls transubstantiation, to bring here under the appearance of bread and wine the actual, literal, Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ.
It isn't always necessary for this phrase to be included, since some few Eastern Rite formulas (many schismatic but long recognized as sacramentally valid none the less) also lack it, but by reducing it so a mere "something," one of several different alternatives which the people are now about to "proclaim," it could be a denial of the actual Mystery of Faith just worked.  For example, saying "Christ will come again" - well excuse me, but if the priest did his job up there, Christ would already be here, how dare we speak of Him as someday coming again, right after He already just arrived?
If the priest is using the Latin edition of the Novus Ordo, "THE MYSTERY OF FAITH" is still part of the key sacramental sentence, and only after that sentence is complete does the audience, with no connection to what Fr. just did, sing their little song-verse (no mention of "proclaiming" anything), before the priest continues.  In the vernacular editions (pretty much all of them equally possess the same deficiencies not in the Latin Novus Ordo, itself an interesting fact), what it would take to attain validity is beyond the scope of what I am going to explain here.
Suffice it to say that the priest who messes it up with either the "FOR ALL" or "THE MYSTERY OF FAITH" or merely rattling off the words, or else if he is not validly ordained, will not say a valid Mass.  It also fails to be valid if sugar cookies or cornbread are used for the "bread" or unfermented grape juice or apple juice for the "wine," as occasionally occurs.  But I do allow that some few Novus Ordos, said under the most optimum circumstances possible, do attain sacramental validity.
But again I remind you, even if sacramental validity is attained, the fact remains that it is still illicit and deleterious to one's faith, even when done in Latin (though much less so).