At every rite in the Church the theology has been changed. Since Vatican Council II is not being interpreted rationally.

At the time 3.21 on this YouTube video Crisis in the Church n.26 Fr. Paul Isaac Franks said that the canon has been changed and the words of the consecration have been changed. This was possible.Since the SSPX accepted the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II. This  produced a break with Tradition. Bishop Bernard Fellay said that the SSPX accepted 90 % of Vatican Council II (irrational). So the Council was a revolution in the Church for the SSPX. It was an accepted new revelation in the Church. This was how the popes and the liberals also understood it. 

So changes were made in the liturgy. The theological basis for the changes came with the confusion in the 1949 LOHO. No one seemed to notice it. What was  invisible was confused as  visible cases saved outside the Church.

When Bishop Fellay criticized Vatican Council II ( irrational) as being a break with Tradition the Left was pleased. He was interpreting the Council just like them. But if he said that the Council is in harmony with traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus, it would be rejected. It would not be accepted politically.So now he is not anti-Semitic.

The SSPX priests follows the political line on Vatican Council II set by Econe. The priests who have spoken on this series cannot comment. They have to wait for orders from Econe. 

They have to accept the political line. They have to receive permission from Econe, to interpret Vatican Council II rationally and honestly.Now they do not have it in Italy or the USA . So no one comments on these blog posts.They have to continue to be dishonest on the Council. It is a political issue.

 The SSPX is still saying that the New Mass is valid but deficient in doctrine. Yes it is valid and doctrine has been changed with a false premise and inference.

At the time 6:45 on this video Fr. Paul Isaac Franks  refers again to the New Theology as if it is restricted only to the Novus Ordo Mass. But the New Theology came from the confusion over what is implicit and explicit, unseen and seen. It comes directly from the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston (LOHO) and then in 1965 through Rahner, Ratzinger and others. They accepted the 1949 Letter of Pope Pius XII.The proof is there before us. We can verify it. This can be immediately checked and corrected. All we have to do is interpret invisible cases (LG 16 etc) as being invisible only. We then return to the old ecclusivist theology. We return to the ecclesiology of the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16^th centuries. There is no rupture with the Church Fathers and the Apostles.

So the New Theology does not come from Henri du Bac (see n.16 in this series) but from the mistake in the 1949 LOHO.

At the time 15:12 on this video  it is asked if a Catholic go for the Byzantine or Melkite rite Mass. Again, at every rite in the Church the theology has been changed. Since Vatican Council II is not being interpreted rationally.  - Lionel Andrades