<>Beats me :) Apparently everything that doessn't duplicate the Mass of the 16th Century, including architecture, vestments, music, type of incense even, I guess, is some abominable heresy and signifies the death knell of Catholicism and all is lost. What faith :)
Pope Pius V created a New Rite after The Council of Trent and it was the right Mass for that age. Pope Paul V created a New Rite ( a revision of the old rite, actually) after the Vatican Two Council and it is the right Mass for this age but some, knowing far more and far better than the Divinely-constituted authority, will have none of it.
THEY, I guess, are the only ones competent to judge and if only they had the authority they justly deserve, all would be right with the world :) <>
This statement is erroneous. Paul VI merely approved a new liturgy created by a committee.
Further, your gratuitous slam "...only [the protesters] know best.." is not really worthy of you.
The Mass as approved by Paul VI would be virtually unrecognizable to most Catholics--it is rarely, if ever, celebrated with the rubrics.
In addition, the Council's specific instructions regarding the 'new Mass' were ignored in practice (although not necessarily in form) by the implementors of the 'novus.'
There are some who would have nothing to do with the novus even if it were celebrated letter-perfect, in Latin, with the smells/bells, and a small army of altar boys. THEY WILL NOT SERVE!!
THere are others, myself included, who would really like to bring the surrounding culture to a level compatible with the Mass's gravity.