Pope Saint Paul VI, Solemni Hac Liturgia, 1968: “founded upon the Apostles and handing on from century to century their ever-living Word and their powers as Pastors in the successor of Peter and the bishops in communion with him; perpetually assisted by the Holy Spirit, She [the Church] has the charge of guarding, teaching, explaining and spreading the Truth which God revealed in a then-veiled manner by the prophets, and fully by the Lord Jesus. We believe all that is contained in the Word of God written or handed down, and that the Church proposes for belief as divinely revealed, whether by a solemn judgment or by the ordinary and universal magisterium. We believe in the infallibility enjoyed by the successor of Peter when he teaches ex cathedra as pastor and teacher of all the faithful, and which is assured also to the episcopal body when it exercises with him the supreme magisterium. We believe that the Church founded by Jesus Christ and for which He prayed is indefectibly one in faith, worship, and the bond of hierarchical communion.”
Notice that the episcopal body only teaches infallibly “when it exercises with him”, that is, with the Pope, “the supreme magisterium. This implies that no teaching of an Ecumenical Council is infallible unless approved by the Pope, and it further implies that no teaching is infallible under the ordinary universal Magisterium unless the Pope teaches the same.
Pope Saint Paul VI also teaches that the Church is indefectible, and so cannot go astray in faith, nor in worship, nor in the bond of communion among the Pope, Bishops, and the rest of the faithful. And this means that the worship of the Church, in the Mass and other liturgical forms, cannot go astray or lead astray. Therefore, the decision by the Pope to institute the Novus Ordo Mass is protected from grave error under indefectibility, as it is part of our worship of God. So when the opponents of Pope Francis, or the opponents of Vatican II, or similar groups, attack the Novus Ordo Mass and claim that this vernacular form of the liturgy is leading the faithful astray from true worship of God, they err gravely against the dogma of indefectibility and against obedience and subjection to the Roman Pontiff.
Ronald L Conte Jr
the reproach of Christ 
Dear Ron,
Thank you very much for this wonderful text of St. Paul VI. Thank you also for considering doing a post on this topic. The ultimate issue, I think comes down to recognizing and honoring the authority of the Roman Pontiff and the body of Bishops, which (as you rightly note) comes from Christ Himself.
Dear Ron,
Thank you very much for this article. I very much appreciate your reference to St. Paul VI’s 1968 “Credo of the People of God” (Solemni Hac Liturgia) on the indefectibility of the Church in faith, worship, and hierarchical communion. Unfortunately, there are many papal critics who obscure this indefectibility. I wonder what you would make of the argument of Dr. John Lamont that the Novus Ordo is valid but illicit. http://dialogos-institute.org/blog/wordpress/disputation-on-the-1970-missal-part-1-dr-john-lamont/
I tried to respond to Lamont’s article here: https://dialogos-institute.org/blog/wordpress/disputation-on-the-1970-missal-part-2-dr-robert-fastiggi/
To me it seems incoherent for Dr. Lamont to claim that Mass of Paul VI is valid but at the same time a “human fabrication” that does “damage to souls.” How can a valid Mass do damage to souls? Is not Dr. Lamont’s position a denial of the indefectibility of the Church in her worship?
I will consider writing a post on this topic. In the meantime, here is what Pope Saint Paul VI says on the subject:
Pope Saint Paul VI, Consistory for the creation of twenty new Cardinals, May 24, 1976:
“On the one hand, there are those who, under the pretext of greater fidelity to the Church and the Magisterium, systematically reject the teachings of the Council itself, its application and the resulting reforms, its gradual application by the Apostolic See and the Episcopal Conferences, under our authority, willed by Christ. Discredit is discredited on the authority of the Church in the name of a Tradition, to which respect is attested only materially and verbally; the faithful distance themselves from the bonds of obedience to the See of Peter as well as to their legitimate Bishops; the authority of today is rejected in the name of that of yesterday. And the fact is all the more serious, since the opposition we are talking about is not only encouraged by some priests, but headed by a Bishop, however always venerated by us, Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre.”
“It is so painful to notice it: but how can we not see, in this attitude — whatever the intentions of these people may be — that they place themselves outside of obedience to, and communion with the Successor of Peter and therefore the Church?”
“Since this, unfortunately, is the logical consequence, that is, when it is argued that it is preferable to disobey on the pretext of keeping one’s faith intact, of working in one’s own way for the preservation of the Catholic Church, while denying it effective obedience. And it is said openly! Indeed, they do not hesitate to assert that the Second Vatican Council lacks binding force; that faith would also be in danger because of the post-conciliar reforms and orientations, which one has the duty to disobey in order to preserve certain traditions.”
“What traditions? It is this group of men — but not the Roman Pontiff, not the Episcopal College, not the Ecumenical Council — who wish to become those who establish a binding decision on which of the innumerable traditions are to be held as norms of faith! As you see, our venerable Brothers, this attitude speaks as if it were judge over that Divine will which placed Peter and his successors at the Head of the Church, so as to confirm his brethren in the faith and so pasture the universal flock (Lk 22:32; Jn 21:15 ff.) and thus establish him as guarantor and custodian of the deposit of the Faith.”
“And this is all the more serious, in particular, when division is introduced, precisely where congregavit nos in unum Christi amor [the love of Christ gathers us as one], in the Liturgy and in the Eucharistic Sacrifice, refusing respect for the norms defined in the liturgical field. It is in the name of Tradition that we ask all our children, all Catholic communities, to celebrate the renewed Liturgy in dignity and fervor. The adoption of the new “Ordo Missae” is certainly not left to the discretion of the priests or the faithful: and the Instruction of June 14, 1971 provided for the celebration of Mass in the old form, with the authorization of the ordinary, only for elderly or infirm priests, who offer the Divine Sacrifice sine populo [without the people]. The new Ordo was promulgated to replace the old one, after mature deliberation, following the requests of the Second Vatican Council. Likewise, our holy Predecessor Pius V had made the reformed Missal compulsory under his authority, following the Council of Trent.”
“We demand the same availability, with the same supreme authority that comes from Christ Jesus, to all the other liturgical, disciplinary and pastoral reforms that have matured in recent years in application of the conciliar decrees. Any initiative that aims to hinder them cannot assume the prerogative of rendering a service to the Church: in fact it causes serious damage to it.”
So it is those who reject the liciety (or validity) of the Novus Ordo rites who cause serious damage to the Church. The same authority which established the Latin form of these rites has now established the Novus Ordo form of the same rites — the supreme authority that comes from Christ Jesus, exercised by the Roman Pontiffs and the body of Bishops led by him. So the Novus Ordo cannot possibly be illicit, having been authorized by the successor of Peter and the successors of the other Apostles. And the attempt to deprive the Pope of the authority to establish the Novus Ordo fails because the same authority established the Latin rites, just as Pope Saint Paul VI explains.