Following Vatican II, a new liturgy was created for the Latin Rite, which is by far the largest rite of the Catholic Church. The new liturgy was called Novus Ordo, or New Order. Traditionalists and schismatics use "Novus Ordo" as if it were a new sect, blaming all the ills of the Catholic Church on "N.O." Really its comparable to the 1911 Missal of the Anglican Church vs. the 1973 Missal. (Not being Anglican, I probably screwed up those dates.) Except since it also changed from Latin to the vernacular, the changes seem all the more drastic.
The Roman Catholic Church had had for many, many decades a huge problem combatting modernism. Naturally, all the modernist heretics saw the changes as an opportunity to slip all their demands into Vatican II, and many bad practices became falsely associated with the Novus Ordo. Of course, none of the were traditionalists, but the traditionalists portray all the Novus Ordo clergy as if they were all heretics.
A fantastic example of why this is false is the homosexual crisis. I get flamed every time I point this out, but there were more REPORTED cases dating from 1963, before Vatican II, than in 1990. By reported, I do not mean that they were reported in 1963, but that they were eventually reported, probably in the last decade. God knows how many went unreported, because the accused in now dead. In any event, the mass being in Latin did not protect anyone from the evils of pedophilia.
The liturgy of the 1928 Book of Common Prayer (Anglican) was in English (not Latin) and it is thanks to Vatican II and the Novus Ordo that the Episcopal Church in the US rewrote the Book of Common Prayer in 1979 as a near carbon copy of the N.O. (much to the dismay of MANY traditionalist/orthodox Anglicans). This, in addition to women's ordination, is what led to the immediate exodus from ECUSA of nearly 100,000 Episcopalians in 1979 and the subsequent decline of that catholic church ever since. You may not see anything wrong with the Novus Ordo (or the '79 BCP) liturgy, but I don't think it's just coincidence that both the Roman Catholic and Anglican Catholic churches have been in steady decline since the advent of both these dramatic revisions in the liturgy. Why? Just my opinion, but I see it as the turning point in both churches...away from God-centered worship and toward a form of religious ritual and entertainment crafted to delight "man". I just don't think either one of these new liturgies fosters a real reverence or a sense of duty to humble ourselves before God. Gone forever is the prayer of humble access..."We do not presume to come to this thy Table, O merciful Lord, trusting in our own rightousness, but in thy manifold and great mercies. We are not worthy..." Heaven forbid (say the revisionists) that anyone should think themselves sinful, unrighteous, or unworthy. This simply does not fit with the Prosperity Gospel of the "Novus Ekklesia."
Like I said, it's just my opinion, but I don't see the N.O. or the '79 BCP as having borne good fruit for either of our churches.