After the 2nd Vatican Council the Latin Church abolished the minor orders and subdiaconate. The function still considered valid were replaced with "ministries" for laypeople.
These include lector, acolyte, and now catechist. (of note, I could be wrong but I don't believe Extraordinary MInister of Communion" is such) These people are blessed (apparently by the Bishop) but not tonsured; one assumes that this is also considered to have some degree of binding permanence. (i.e. you don't do this if you teach a class or two, and you don't just willy-nilly receive this and then quit after a few years)
The motivations were to expand these tasks away from only young men studying for the priesthood; considering minor orders clergy was considered restrictive. Now only deacons, priests, and bishops are considered clergy.
Paul VI's encyclical
IMO, reading Pope Paul's encyclical there's not too much functional difference between an institued reader and a tonsured reader beyond the tonsure, the clerical garb (even though many lay people at the altar or the schola pre-Vatican II dressed in liturgical garb), the fact that the lay ministry is implictly open to either sex (though Pope Paul stressed it was for men only), AND (here's IMO the crux) the tonsured reader is expected to be on his way to the priesthood.
This last point is the same (what some people say clericist)
paradigm that the presbyterate is the real clergy, which can't really figure out what to do with minor orders and the diaconate outside of that paradigm. And arguably in that course Pope Francis opened the instituted ministries to women last year, while at least implicitly reaffirming that the clergy is all male. (not going to go through this with a fine toothed comb to see if this is impicitly or explicitly repeated)
https://www.vatican.va/content/fran...co-motu-proprio-20210110_spiritus-domini.html
To hit the side issues:
Growing up with both the "old" Mass and the "new" Mass, there is definitely a conservative and defiant subtrend among those who prefer the old Mass, IMO because people in that subtrend are the Latin Catholic manifestation of a tendency across religions for some segments to reject "modernity", however you want to define it, and find their spiritual homes in the "old" Mass. At the same time, there are plenty of good pious communities of folks (often with large families) who prefer the "old" Mass. (and as an aside, if anyone rails on about the old or the new I have an instinctive negative impression)
And as for:
First, as Father Deacon Lance said, an encylclical is not a solemn attempt at extraordinary infallible definition. Episcopal encyclicals (to include the Pope) are "ordinary" attempts to give the authentic interpretation of revelation. Thus over 2000 years there are undoubtedly 1000s of documents in the "ordinary" magisterium; not every word is necessarily meant to be pregnant with revelatory interpretation, and given the diverse people and times not only is context necessary but there's also contradictions within this body.
He can say it's "evil" if he (or more likely the functionary from the Congregation for the Propogation of the Faith who drafted it for him) desires. Again, context is important to figure out what he's trying to say, and even then this specific judgment is not necessarily universally binding for all time. Very clearly, rightly or wrongly, girls and even woman serve as acolytes at the altar in many Latin Catholic parishes today and many bishops today implicitly believe he was wrong.
Note that he is condemning an alleged Greek practice, in a long encyclical about the Eastern Churches (note that it talks extensively about Eastern vs. Latin practices. Also note it has discussion forbidding Rite-switching which is effectively void today).
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/observance-of-oriental-rites-3328
I apologize this is verging outside of the realm of "Church News".