Why would one explicitly seek permission to banalize the Mass (Pope Benedict did indeed label it, rather famously, a "banal, on the spot production")? Why not just go with the tried and true Holy Sacrifice whose canon dates to the 6th century?
Perhaps because to the modernist mind the sublime is inscrutable. The modernist thinks in terms of the banal, unable to transcend what is aesthetic and sacrosanct.
The better solution would seem to involve several steps:
1. The Holy Father would need to crack down, particularly in the United States. Slowly "Tridentinize" the Novus Ordo, first by excising that which pertains to the NO; no more altar girls, no laypeople in the sanctuary at all save the altar servers, no lay readers, no laypeople dispensing Holy Communion (in short, relegate the laity to the pews, where they belong), no more table, no more reception in the hand, no more standing, no more "Gather Together" or "Breaking Bread" hymnals, no more "Gather Us In" songs.
That's the devout wish of every trad. It's impractical because the US hierarchy under the USCCB will oppose any nuanced overture towards "tridentinizing" the NOM. The conservative bishops in the USCCB have practically no say in church matters and/or are overruled if they so much as sided with the Holy Father.
2. The next is active transformation; a series of liturgical catechetical talks at all Masses for weeks, explaining, for instance, why the Mass is the Sacrifice, why the priest makes 52 signs of the cross and why they are made in groups of 2, 3, and 5, why we genuflect, why we kneel (hey, people need to know, and by the looks of those standing during the Consecration, they must not), why the Mystery of Faith we refer to belongs in the Consecration and should not be rendered "Christ will come again" when Christ just has come again, the restoration of the high altar, the correct translation into the vernacular of anything that remains in the vernacular, the restoration of the tabernacle on the altar, the restoration of the altar rail, the training of the choir in polyphony and chant.
This should have been the proper method when introducing the NOM at the get-go. However, sanctification was never in their minds, never written in their agenda. Instead the sanctimonious (feigned piety) is what took hold of the way the NOM was going to be.
3. Add Latin. First the propers; the Kyrie (Greek, actually), the Sanctus, the Agnus Dei, the Credo, the Confiteor (and this, as the other prayers, must be restored to its original form, with all the saints mentioned, etc.), the Pater. Eucharistic prayers numbered 2-13 (or is it 15?) might do well to be left aside for now. There was nothing wrong with St. Gregory's Canon.
4. Give it a few months, then restore the Canon to Latin, as well as the old calendar with all its feasts, Ember days, fasts, etc.
Eventually, dispense with the charade, bring back all the Traditional prayers, and restore the Missal of 1962. The Tridentine Mass. Perhaps the only development which might be advisable would be to coordinate the schola's chanting with the priest's prayers so as to time them a bit better. That and maybe making some of the previously inaudible prayers audible, so as not to completely disenchant a laity far too used to "being involved."
In 1965 when the first experiments were being tested, the NOM as it was then, is unrecognizable to the NOM in the vernacular of today. Although most of the original Latin prayers of the TLM were retained, e.g. "Dominus vobuscum," "Et cum spiritu tuo," "The Credo," "The Orate Fratres" etc., the English translation (side by side with the Latin) suffered much. The typical edition of the 1970 Missal of Paul VI was no longer what was proposed in 1965, nor did it resemble it.
By this point, the sniveling modernist "liturgy directors" will have fled to the nearest Evangelical Church, the conservatives will rejoice to see that their suffering through sacrilegious Masses need not be so anymore, the traditionalists will rejoice about no longer needing to drive 3 hours to get to Mass on Sundays, the priests and bishops who advocate female ordination, promote sodomy, contraception, and disrespect to the Blessed Sacrament probably will have broken off into schism, and we'll have a smaller, more faithful Church prepared to reel in the 50% of wandering, aimless, apostasized folk who dribbled out from 1965 to 2002 after seeing too many of their priests no longer take the Faith seriously.
But I'll bet the ranch that these sniveling modernists will still be there and will still call themselves The American Catholic Church. Perhaps they might even patent or copyright the term "Catholic" so nobody else can use it, as that sniveling ex-nun know-it-all vice-chancellor in Milwaukee would like to have it her way.
At least, that's a plan.
We'll have to bombard heaven with prayers and sacrifices. I don't hope to see this happening in my lifetime, though.
