A recent post  on NLM prompts me to take up the question anew:  Exactly what is the "reform of the reform"?
Liturgically  astute observers often describe novus ordo (ordinary form)  Masses celebrated in a solemn, beautiful, and more-traditional way  (e.g., Latin, ad orientem, only male servers, etc.) as "reform of  the reform" Masses.  Such celebrations might be described more  accurately as examples of the "recatholicization of the reform" proposed  by Msgr. M. Francis Mannion.[1]  It is a distinction with a real  difference.Both agendas arose from the premise that the  liturgical reforms enacted after 1965, when the Second Vatican Council  ended, often exceeded the reforms actually prescribed by the Council,  and that greater continuity should have been maintained between the  Missal of 1962 (the most recent pre-conciliar missal) and the Missal  promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970.  However, they propose different  remedies for improving the deficiencies of the earlier reform.
The  agenda of reforming the reform seeks to heal the rift between the old  and new forms of the Roman rite by bringing them together in substantial  unity.  This would inevitably involve structural changes to the present  liturgical order.  Within the “reform of the reform” camp, a spectrum  of positions exists and a variety of schemes are proposed.[2]   For  example, as to the utility of the 1962 Missal in reforming the reform,  some view it as the point of departure for an alternative  implementation of the reforms prescribed by the Council, while others  view it as the point of reference for guiding the present Mass  in a traditional direction.  Either way, the goal is liturgical life in  discernible continuity with the spirit, forms and texts of the historic  Roman rite as developed organically over the course of many centuries.   Practically speaking, this would have to mean an order of Mass more  closely related to the 1962 Missal than to the Missal "of Paul VI."
By  contrast, the recatholicization of the reform is not interested  primarily in rewriting the liturgical books in a traditional direction  (or, for that matter, in a progressive direction), but rather in  celebrating the revised liturgy in a manner which makes it more  expressive of liturgical tradition and which highlights the transcendent  character and sacred ethos of Catholic worship.
Both of  these two programs, the "reform of the reform" and the  "recatholicization of the reform," are corrective approaches to  liturgical renewal within tradition.  Both represent distinct,  though complementary, strands of the new Liturgical Movement called for  by then-Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.[3]  Adherents  of both these positions have been encouraged by the Holy Father's  liturgical writings and personal liturgical example.
Nevertheless,  only one of these two programs, namely recatholicization, can be put  into practice right now because it requires no changes to the existing  set of liturgical options.  The reform of the reform, on the other hand,  depends on more than the Pope's personal liturgical example, more than  improved translations, more than adherence to the rubrics and  disciplinary norms...  As my friend is wont to say with no hint of  legalism, "We are a Church of law."  Until such legislative baby steps  as the rescinding of certain permissions and exceptions (indults) are  taken,[4]  the reform of the reform cannot be said to have begun in earnest.
____________
[1] See M. Francis  Mannion, "The Catholicity of the Liturgy," in Beyond the Prosaic:  Renewing the Liturgical Movement, ed. Stratford  Caldecott (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998), 11-48.  Msgr. Mannion  founded the Society for Catholic  Liturgy in 1995.
[2] See T. M. Kocik, The Reform of the Reform? A Liturgical Debate: Reform or Return (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003).
[3] J. Ratzinger, Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977, trans. Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1998), 149; idem, The Spirit of the Liturgy, trans. John Saward (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2000), 8-9.
[4] Would it be too extreme to withdraw permission for the use of white vestments at Masses for the dead (except perhaps in countries where white is the color of mourning)? or for the presence of cremated remains at funeral Masses?
fonte:new liturgical movement