If you read The Tablet ("to see what it says") etc., I recommend Fr John Zuhlsdorf's fisk on the article against Summorum Pontificum by Fr Mark Francis which he refers to as "a condescending and embittered public unburdening of hatred for those who are attached to previous liturgical forms." The memorable line in the Tablet article is where the Pope is said to be "not a trained liturgist". Fr Z justly lampoons this ridiculous assertion.
In conversation the other day with other priests, we agreed that the Tablet is probably right in one respect. Apparently the editorial bemoans the fact that the Pope has denied that Vatican II marked a radical change in the Church.
Indeed. There was no radical change. We are the same Church. It has not changed in essentials. Blessed Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI said as much. Furthermore, to avoid any ambiguity, the Pope told us that the old Mass was not abrogated. Then, coming from the blind side, it was authoritatively clarified that "subsistit" did not mean that the Catholic Church was not the one true Church.
The "subsistit" document does look like the second part of a combination punch from the Holy Father. The widely heralded "Motu Proprio" was met with stiff chins just before the "Subsistit" document delivered a sharp blow with the right to the solar plexus.
The Sidcup Boxing Club would be proud of the feint.