Dom Alcuin Reid has a wonderful paper on what he calls the New Liturgical Movement. You can read the whole thing here and it is well worth reading. I present excerpts below that back up what I've been saying all along.
... An authentic interpretation of the Second Vatican Council’s mandate for liturgical reform.
Perhaps the best way to explore this element is through a series of pithy statements that accurately reflect the content of Sacrosanctum Concilium ....
i. Active participation means actual participation not activist participation.
ii. Widespread formation and immersion in the Church’s liturgical life
and tradition is an essential pre-requisite to actual participation and
is a far greater priority than ritual reform.
iii. That “there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church
genuinely and certainly requires them; and care must be taken that any
new forms adopted should in some way grow organically from forms already
existing” means exactly that.
iv. Giving a suitable place to the vernacular does not mean totally vernacularising the liturgy to the exclusion of Latin.
v. That the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin
rites suggests that Latin should be something with which all our
congregations are familiar from regular use.
vi. Allowing the extended use of concelebration is not about forming
generations of priests who do not know how or even why one would
celebrate Mass privately, let alone how to behave as concelebrants.
vii. Judging that Holy Communion may be administered under both species
on certain occasions does not mandate the creation of legions of
extraordinary ministers, unworthy vessels for the Precious Blood or
questionable if not downright sacrilegious practices in respect to their
viii. Providing a richer fare for the faithful at the table of God's
word does not mean destroying a truly ancient order or readings, nor
does it authorise the excising of uncomfortable portions of Sacred
Scripture from the lectionary.
ix. Singing the liturgy, not singing at the liturgy, is what is required.
x. Noble simplicity does not mandate simplicity being ignobly visited upon the liturgy.
xi. Revising the liturgical books does not authorise the wholesale
recasting of their calendars, the ideological purging of their proper
prayers, or the insertion of liturgical texts reconstructed according to
insufficiently tested scholarly fashions. ...