Over at The Record there is an excellent editorial on the new missal - do go and read it.
Basically it is pointing out the implicit clericalism, and blatant disregard of the right of the laity to receive what the Church wants to offer its people, of the National Council of Priests in its dispute over the new missal.
Here is an extract:
"If it is a fundamental principle of the Catholic Church that all Catholics, by virtue of their Baptismal grace, are full and equal members of the Church, it is also true that all Catholics have, at all times, the right to receive what the Church wishes to give them. By indicating it may support priests in boycotts, the NCPA now appears unable to deny that it or some of its members will effectively encourage a programme of disenfranchising ordinary Catholics of their Baptismal rights to the best liturgy the Church can provide. And it can only be described as ironic that while on the one hand it raises “concerns” at what it describes as “exclusive language,” the NCPA appears to have no equal “concerns” at excluding Catholics from the liturgy which is theirs by right.
By beginning or supporting a campaign to oppose the introduction of the new translations, the NCPA now gives the impression of being prepared to deliberately place obstacles in the way of baptised Catholics and their families. If so, on what authority does it do so and and from whom did it receive the mandate for such a course? And, having flagged such possibilities, it is hard to see how the organisation no longer appears to be able to avoid the criticism that it is lapsing into treating baptised Catholics in the pews as second-class citizens in their own churches. Is there one standard for members of the NCPA and quite another for ordinary Catholics?"
The time for 'almost-anything-goes' liturgy is past. We the laity must stand up and resist this kind of narcissistic clericalism that says father's whims should prevail without reference to proper law, Pope, bishop or pewsitter! True priestly authority comes from obedience not dissent.
And that's a principle traditionalists need to keep in mind as well, as we come up to the season of Easter Vigils, for example, and the temptation to use (unless of course proper approval has been obtained) the pre-1955 forms, or some other curious hybrid, rather than the 1962 books, once more rears its head...