I do realize that many a Vatican official has labeled the reforms introduced by the Vatican II as "irreversible," but if memory serves me well, the Councils and the Church are also "inerrant." If that is so, then why is there even talk of reforming the reform? Something doesn't fit here.
And what responsibility, if any, do popes who presided over these liturgical abuses, have in this matter, or are they simply excused as passive bystanders?
Curious minds would like to know.
As I recall from all that I have read over the past 10 years, VCII was intended to 'reform' the TLM. Again, from what I understand, the Latin Mass was 'sealed' for 500 years. Liturgy is not fixed, it is fluid as exemplified by the evolution of what resulted in the (now) TLM. Once the seal was affixed, the evolution was halted. There are gaps in the old Latin Mass. At certain parts, the priest extends his hands and says "Oremus" (Let us pray) but there is no prayer that follows. These gaps are what most participants anticipated would be addressed. Instead, certain bishops (from around the world) expressed an interest in adjusting the liturgy to suit their culture - hece, liturgical dance, etc. Once the discussions began, more ecclesial interests were addressed in the actual documents. What went wrong was writing those documents in such a was as to allow for 'interpretation'. For example, there are certain small parishes in the US comprised of immigrants. For them, the loopholes in the documents were interpreted as approving liturgical dance or some other novelty from their culture. Once it began, other parishes caved. Locally, I battled the pastor of my now former parish + the bishop who approved him introducing liturgical dance. The dioces demonstrated their support by citing a VCII document on multiculturism. That did not fly here because there was only one 'immigrant' family in the parish and they were not from a culture where dance was the tradition. In my 2nd response to the diocese, I quoted Canon Law - "every catholic is entitled to a valid liturgy". That ended the potential abuse. No Catholic should have to resort to these means to protect the Mass celebrated at their parish.
This is my understanding of how this all transpired over the past 4 decades. The important point now is that this nonsense is beginning to wind down. The bishops who instituted these changes, for the most part, are retired or nearing retirement age. Attn NT Hockey - you have my sympathy on the situation in your diocese. Like you, our diocese offers the TLM at only one church. Last month, the bishop announced that particular church was being closed, along with several others in that area. That will bring to 66, the number of churches and schools he has closed since becoming bishop 35+ years ago. He will reach mandatory retirement age in just under 5 years. That leaves him ample time to wreck further damage on his diocese.