2) The above facilitated, open the door to: the insertion of purposely ambiguous language in VatII, that would later be interpreted to the benefit of the progressives
3)It was the change to the vernacular mass, which opened up the New Mass to all kinds of ad-libbing, as many masses as there were priests (and the Charismatic masses, Clown masses, Conga line masses, Polka masses). Something which could not be done with the mass had it been done in Latin.
Look, what happened was exactly what the progressivists had planned. They had no intention of just doing the New Mass in Latin with the same churches,high altars, vestments, altar men/boys, that existed for like 500 years. They wanted what you see. Had they done the Novus Ordo in Latin, with the same vestments, altars,churches, altar servers as in the 1950’s NO ONE WOULD HAVE NOTICED! That was not their intention, they wanted what you see today.
In the end, the shortage of priests is simple (it stems from the same cause of the shortage of mass attending men) - What man would want to be a priest (or attend mass) in this TOTALLY effeminatized mass environment? Only feelings oriented effeminatized men.
Your first two points are good. I have to disagree with your criticism of the vernacular Mass. Ad-libbing can be done in any language, including Latin. Non-standard Masses are almost entirely due to loosely worded Vatican II standards and liberal Bishops who fail to reign in rogue priests, not the language in which they are said.
I don’t have any disrespect for those who want the Mass said in Latin. I would imagine that you have a strong sense for the importance of tradition and feel that the Mass in a different language imparts an element of respect that the Mass deserves.
But could a Charimatic Mass be said in Latin? Of course it could. Could a Latin Mass have folk singers singing the Beatles “Let It Be”? Of course. Could liberal priests promote the importance of turning to socialism in the middle of a Latin Mass? Of course they could, and they did it prior to Vatican II.
Had Vatican II been the same as it is now but kept the Mass in Latin, I don’t see any evidence that anything would have turned out differently.