Rorate Caeli has begun a series of posts publishing the excellent analysis of the two forms of the Roman Rite of Mass titled The Roman Rite: Old and New.
The link to the first installment is here. I encourage everyone to follow this and other installments as they come up. To give you an idea of the focus of the essay, read this brief excerpt from the Preface:
The liberalization of the Old Roman Rite by the Supreme Pontiff in September 2007 has stimulated a variety of reactions. Polemicists on the side of modernity have labelled it as “something for nostalgics” or as incomprensible and therefore to be rejected; while polemicists on the side of Tradition have labelled the New Rite (as they always had) as invalid or sacrilegious.
Pacifists, by contrast, have either attributed the preference for one rite or the other to “sensibility” alone, or have ascribed an equal value to both rites, speaking for example of “respective strengths”, such as a greater “verticality” in the Old Rite and a wider range of readings in the New. If such persons have any reservations concerning the New Rite, they claim that it suffices to celebrate it well and reverently.
To this background, the present essay aims to evaluate the two rites scientifically: more precisely to compare them in regard to their theology of the Mass. In so doing, it seeks neither to make peace nor war, but simply to establish the truth, by examining the relevant facts and drawing the necessary conclusions.