My viewpoint is no more irrelevant than yours. If you attend a Latin Mass, you apparently are not following the council’s “call for changes in the liturgy”.
For what good purpose was a council (”to call for changes in the liturgy”) if Pope Benedict would, 50 years later, proclaim the TLM to never have been abrogated? The novus ordo Mass that he now asks for a “reform of the reform”?
Answer: For no good purpose.
However, I am willing to entertain the thought that the council was hijacked for more nefarious reasons than just butchering the Holy Mass.
You wrote:
“My viewpoint is no more irrelevant than yours.”
Actually, it is - on that matter.
“If you attend a Latin Mass, you apparently are not following the council’s “call for changes in the liturgy”.”
Nope. I only follow the changes made to the Mass by John XXIII and Pius XII (and whoever else I might be forgetting over the last 400 years).
“For what good purpose was a council (”to call for changes in the liturgy”) if Pope Benedict would, 50 years later, proclaim the TLM to never have been abrogated?”
The council did not deal with only the liturgy.
“The novus ordo Mass that he now asks for a “reform of the reform”? Answer: For no good purpose.”
That’s your conclusion. That’s not the conclusion of the Church.
“However, I am willing to entertain the thought that the council was hijacked for more nefarious reasons than just butchering the Holy Mass.”
What you will or will not entertain is irrelevant.