Asking peoples thoughts and discernment on this topic and how you came to your particular conclusion?
According to at least one priest and cannon lawyer. It is valid and illicit.
The Catholic Church promulgated the Novus Ordo Mass. Do you presume to know better than Holy Mother Church? Those who challenge its validity or efficiacy set themselves above the magisterium. In their hubris they fancy themselves the betters of popes and bishops. In their hearts they are Protestants not Catholics.
I’m not sure this topic is allowed. But story short: Valid and Licit. Why would it be invalid? You can’t say “because it’s not in Latin”. Well, neither was the institution of the Eucharist. You can’t say because “so and so council is heretical” well, it’s not, and even some groups traditonally considered heretical (Syriac Orthodox, Church of the East, although recent Christological agreements are promising) have valid sacraments. Just because someone prefers something else doesn’t make it heretical.
You might like this article:
Ten Objections to the New Mass: Answered
In it, I go through some of the common objections to the New Mass and reply to them, showing that a lot of the stuff some people object to was actually in place Before the New Mass, such as facing toward the people (allowed in the Old Mass) and receiving Communion in in the hand (allowed among the Church Fathers). Please let me know what you think.