[american colleen]

I'm not Catholic, but my roots are Irish Cathloic, as are my husband's. During family get togethers, my Catholic relations frequently express anger over the Vatican II changes. I have to think this must be a common opinion among mainline Catholics.

Vatican II didn't change any teachings of the Church but it did change the language and some traditions of the Mass. Many "innovators" encouraged and implemented changes that were not mandated by Vatican II and a lot of Catholics are unhappy with the way *some* maybe even most priests now say the Mass. But the essense of the Mass never changed (the host is still consecrated and therefore becomes the body and blood of Jesus Christ) it's just the more modern elements of it that some people become angry over.

[ultima ratio]

What you say is only partially true. The Novus Ordo is not just a Mass that's a variation of the ancient Mass of Catholicism. It is actually subversive of the faith--dangerous for Catholics. The Catholic elements are admittedly present--the valid Consecration--and the actual sacrifice--but they have been hidden and subverted. In some dioceses, particularly in the midwest, they have been totally obscured. In more traditional dioceses--such as those in the Northeast--this is less apparent. Yet statistics tell the real story: since the advent of the Novus Ordo, there has been a precipitous decline in the faith.