Why allow the liturgical reform of Pius V while forbidding the liturgical reform of Paul VI?
The attempt to set the two liturgical reforms as being parallel is nothing but a deception. What Pope Pius V called a “reform” was merely the Mass as it had already been for centuries. The changes only applied to various local forms which had sprouted in the previous 200 years, which amounted to a small prayer here, or an additional rubric there, or even a saint who is only locally honored. For the reform of Pius V, no new prayers were written, only each prayer as said in most regions was universally applied, and even that much was only done where the different traditions were less than 200 years old. If anything, the reform of Pius V strengthened the uniformity of worship throughout the Church. By contrast, the deform of Paul VI smashed “the Mass” into smithereens, with each one being a unique religion unto itself. It did the very opposite of what the Pius V reform did, and had the very opposite effect. Many prayers were mutilated or even rewritten for the Paul VI “Mass” by people who
