If only the changes in the liturgy had stopped at this. If there was such a burning, unmet need to celebrate Mass in the vernacular, this is what should have been done. I am not convinced there was such a need, but there are different schools of thought on this. It is not beyond anyone of average intelligence to master enough Latin, and familiarity with it, to understand at least the gist of the Ordo Missae.
A slow process was used, much like putting the frog in cold water, and gradually bringing the heat up to the boiling point.
Once the change to the English translation was completely accepted by an unsuspecting laity, then the modernists said that we must modernize the English and get rid of the "thee, thou, thy, and thine." Next, the same modernists in the Diocesan Liturgical Commissions said that we needed to reduce the English language to more simple terms so that children and the youth could understand the Mass. Finally, in came ICEL who insisted that we use a newly approved papal Lutheran translation so that we could be on the same page as the Protestants and ease their way into the Catholic Church. At the same time in the early 1960s, the Jesuits were introducing the Charismatic Renewal Movement which invited Protestants to lead a special anointing with a service known as "the Baptism of the Holy Spirit," where people started babbling in strange tongues, falling on the floor in the "spirit", and giving prophecies led by the Protestants. Ecumenism was well on the way. Soon the Rosary was tossed out as incompatible with Protestant beliefs, and the people sang, "We are one in the Spirit."
What "spirit" would cause people to become hysterical and laugh so hard that they would pee in their pants during the Toronto Blessing? Could they have been tricked by the devil, that other spirit?