My post had to do with the erroneous idea that restoring the old liturgy would be a panacea.
I agree, it is not a cure-all. But it would be a giant step in the direction of understanding the traditional faith and consequently, catechesis.
I have no hatred of the old Liturgy.
I have not sensed any hatred coming from you, sorry if others get that impression.
One reason I stopped assisting at the Indult was my wife pointed out to me the rather haughty and self-righteous attitude which permeated the sermons of the Priest who offered the Indult. I really didn't want to face the matter but she was right. I began to listen more closely and it was clear he considered "us" more faithful and orthodox Catholics than "they" who accepted the Pauline Rite.
I do not doubt it. If you draw no distinction between the two liturgies then of course there is no reason for an us/them dichotomy. However, the traditionalists have been given the shaft since Vatican II for no reason and with a cavalier disregard by the "progressives". They don't have to be haughty, they won the battle. The NO liturgy is everywhere the norm and one struggles to find an indult or resigns themselves to the SSPX or worse. Where is the charity in the Church for the traditionalist? They feel persecuted because they are. The church occasionally will pay them lip service but her heart is far from them.
I don't see the church returning to the 16th Century but I don't respond in that way because I reject or hate the Old Roman Missal. You conflate and confuse the issues into "hatred" I am afraid.
Again, I do not understand you equating the 1962 missal with the 1500's. I suppose it is this rhetoric that may lead some to believe that you are being contemptuous of your more traditional brethren.
Thanks for the kind words and the cautions, Trad...They are heard and understood, brother