The link below is to a statement from about 6 months ago from the SSPX on "Moto Proprio". I find it very interesting, and I think the problems in the church were actually a goal of some of the architects of VII. I also think nothing in VII or the docs that followed called for the Priest to be facing the pews, except on the occasions where the priest is told to turn to face us in the pews. The idea that he must turn around to do this indicate he was facing ad orientem at each instance before he turns. That seems like a weird detail to pull out on this but I think, short of learning Latin WELL (not bad enough to be bamboozled into accepting any interpretation or translation of it, which in some videos of Father Hess he shows where they twist the Latin of older Papal documents to say things they do not say) to really understand it, there are simple ways to discern which side is right in the struggle over what mass the church should use.
Here is a long quote from the middle:
"On one side is the Mass of All Times. It is the standard of a Church that defies the world and is certain of victory, for its battle is nothing less that the continuation of the battle that Our Blessed Lord waged to destroy sin and to destroy the kingdom of Satan. It is by the Mass and through the Mass that Our Lord enlists Catholic souls into His ranks, by sharing with them both His Cross and His victory. From all this follows a fundamentally militant conception of Christian life that is characterised by two elements: a spirit of sacrifice and an unwavering supernatural hope."
"On the other side stands the Mass of Paul VI. It is an authentic expression of a Church that wants to live in harmony with the world and that lends an ear to the world’s demands. It represents a Church that, in the final analysis, no longer needs to fight against the world because it no longer has anything to reproach the world. Here is a Church that no longer has anything to teach the world because it listens to the powers of the world. It is a Church that no longer needs the Sacrifice of Our Blessed Lord because, having lost the notion of sin, it no longer has anything for which to atone. Here is a Church that no longer has the mission of restoring the universal kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, because it wants to make its contribution to the creation on this earth of a better world that is freer, more egalitarian and more eco-responsible – and all this with purely human means. This humanist mission that the men of the Church have given themselves must necessarily be matched by a liturgy that is equally humanist and emptied of any notion of sacredness. "
"This battle that has been waged for the past fifty years, which has just seen a highly significant event on July 16th, is not a simple war between two rites: it is indeed a war between two different and opposing conceptions of the Catholic Church and of Christian life – conceptions that are absolutely irreducible and incompatible with each other. In paraphrasing Saint Augustin, one could say that the two Masses have built two cities: the Mass of All Times has built a Christian city; the New Mass seeks to build a humanist and secular city."
The whole letter is worth reading, and when coupled with so many Marian apparitions telling us in no uncertain terms that the church would lose the faith and mislead the faithful, I think the distinction is clear as to which is real and timeless and which is a forfeiture meant to lead us not to God but into error.
The error might look like an error of trying to solve worldly problems with worldly means, but that's the lie that will trap us. It is a snare of the devil. You do not solve problems on the problem's terms. You transcend the problem to overcome it, and then look back saying "what was I so caught up in?"
https://stas.org/en/news-events/news/letter-father-pagliarani-about-motu-proprio
there doesn't seem to be anything here