Fr Bryan Houghton (whose recently rediscovered manuscript has been published as Unwanted Priest and which I have already puffed once or twice) recalls that, in December 1966, he met again Bishop Thomas Leo Parker, of Northampton.
"We were left alone--as everyone avoided him--and I took him by the lapels of his jacket and shook him: 'Good heavens, my Lord! I have known you for twenty-five years. You don't agree with what is going on! Why don't you have the courage of your convictions?' He looked away and said nothing. He retired in January 1967. Poor man! He had no personal friends. His life was Holy Mother Church. She had let him down. Poor man!"
Perhaps some readers may point out that Houghton was biased and that his antennae might have got things wrong ... although, of course, other readers might point out, with equal truth, that those who promoted and promote the Liturgical Revolution might also have had, and have, their own biases.
But here comes an oddity ... does anybody have any ideas?
Bishop Leo retired in 1967. In accordance with the customs of the day, he was then 'translated' to the titular see of Magarmel in partibus infidelium. The thinking was that a bishop should be bishop of somewhere, even if there were no Catholics there for him to shepherd. Being Bishop of one of these titular sees (Magarmel was in Algeria) involved no work; no residence; no diocesan responsibilities.
But Parker resigned this titular see, with its purely nominal dignity, in 1970 (he died in 1975).