[quote=ByzCath]There is no such thing as “The Novus Ordo Church” or “The Concilliar Church”, there is only the Catholic Church.
You also seem to not know what schism means.
Schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.
So for the Catholic Church to be in schism means that the Pope refuses to submit to himself and is not in communion with the rest of the Catholic Church.
The Mass of the One True Church is not the Mass of the Council of Trent as you seem to neglect all the other Churches that make up the Catholic Church.
The Mass is the form of the Eucharistic Sacrifice in the Latin Catholic Church. We Byzantines have the Divine Liturgy.
Before Trent, each local Church had its on variation of the Mass. It was Quo Primum that placed one Mass for the whole of the Latin Church.
It is you who is in schism by denying the right of the Pope to change the discipline of the Mass.
I am somewhat confused by your definition of the word “schism” and your accusation of myself being in schism: If what you say is true, and I am not knowledgeable of the meaning of the word “schism”, but what you are saying is a Catholic not in communion with those in The Roman Rite of the Catholic Church are schismatic, then you say, I am schismatic, because you argue that I deny the right of the Pope to change the discipline of the mass. This makes no sense to me. Would you explain what you are driving at, and are you as a Byzantine Catholic in schism? In anycase, what little I understand about papal authority as regards him in the position as magisterium of the church is this: The magisterium is divided in two parts: The Ordinary Magisterium of the Church must be obeyed by all Catholics. The Authoritative Magisterium of the Church need not be obeyed by all Catholics. Those changes to the mass, to the church as contained in The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), were given as I understand it under The Authoritative Magisterium of the Church and therefore, no schism can be considered for the reason that not all Catholics are obligated in obedience to all done by a pope.
I will not raise many questions about your point contending a pope in order to be schismatic must be contrary to a popes own magisterium, The Ordinary Magisterium, but I should say, it makes sense to my view that no pope acting upon, or acting out The Ordinary Magisterium of The Roman Catholic Church may go contrary to what has been established as such, by other popes, say Pope Saint Pius X, and Pope Saint Pius V.
The label given to The Concilliar Church is a justifiable label for what I call The Novus Ordo Church, which I begged the question in so naming: Assuming without evidence the point is true; however, as I make no claim on the matter–no question, truly, has been begged.
I am aware there are many rites in The Catholic Church. I am aware that many of these rights are not only schismatic, materially schismatic by way of history, but also it would appear to me that they are heretical: Accepting the succession of popes since St. Peter is a scripturally based hierarchy and therefore, infallible. This teaching is fundamental to The Roman Catholic Church, and infallible as I understand it.